Sections 46, 47 and 47A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Facts bearing upon opinions of experts, opinion as to handwriting, and opinion as to digital signature where relevant.

Applicable-law note: This article explains the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 position immediately before the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force. It is intended for matters governed by the earlier evidence law.

Sections 46, 47 and 47A form part of the rules dealing with opinion evidence. Section 46 makes certain supporting or inconsistent facts relevant when an expert opinion is itself relevant. Section 47 deals with the opinion of a person acquainted with another person's handwriting. Section 47A addresses the opinion of the Certifying Authority that issued a Digital Signature Certificate.

Section 46 - Facts bearing upon opinions of experts

Meaning: A fact that would otherwise be irrelevant becomes relevant when it supports, or is inconsistent with, an expert opinion that is relevant to the proceeding.

Facts, not otherwise relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when such opinions are relevant.

Illustrations

If the issue is whether A was poisoned by a particular poison, evidence that other persons poisoned by it displayed symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be symptoms of that poison is relevant.
If the issue is whether a harbour obstruction was caused by a particular sea-wall, evidence concerning similarly situated harbours without such sea-walls, which became obstructed at about the same time, is relevant.

Section 46 therefore permits the court to examine factual material that tests the soundness of a relevant expert opinion rather than considering the opinion in isolation.

Section 47 - Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant

Meaning: When a court must decide who wrote or signed a document, the opinion of a person acquainted with the supposed writer's handwriting is a relevant fact.

When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of a person acquainted with that handwriting, as to whether it was or was not written or signed by that person, is relevant.

When is a person acquainted with handwriting?

For this purpose, acquaintance may arise because the person has seen the writer write, has received documents purporting to be written by that person in the ordinary course of correspondence, or has habitually dealt with such documents in the ordinary course of business.

Illustration

If the question is whether a letter is in A's handwriting, persons who regularly corresponded with A, examined A's correspondence in the course of duty, or habitually dealt with letters purporting to be from A may give relevant opinion evidence even if they never personally saw A write.

Section 47A - Opinion as to digital signature, when relevant

Meaning: When the court has to form an opinion about a person's digital signature, the opinion of the Certifying Authority that issued the Digital Signature Certificate is a relevant fact.

The provision connects proof of a disputed digital signature with the Certifying Authority responsible for issuing the relevant Digital Signature Certificate.

A Certifying Authority operates within the statutory framework for electronic and digital signatures. Section 47A therefore identifies the issuing Certifying Authority's opinion as legally relevant when the authenticity of a digital signature is in issue.

Practical distinction between Sections 46, 47 and 47A

Section 46 concerns facts that support or contradict relevant expert opinion. Section 47 concerns non-expert opinion based on familiarity with handwriting. Section 47A specifically concerns the opinion of the issuing Certifying Authority in relation to a digital signature. The provisions address different evidentiary routes and should be applied according to the nature of the disputed fact.

Official text

For the statutory text and amendment history, refer to the India Code portal of the Government of India.