37. Judgments or orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36, are irrelevant, unless the existence of such judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue, or is relevant under some other provision of this Adhiniyam.
Illustrations.
(a) A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them. C
in each case says that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the
circumstances are such that it is probably true in each case, or in neither.
A obtains a decree against C for damages on the ground that C failed to make
out his justification. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C.
(b) A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him. B is convicted. A afterwards sues C for the cow, which B had sold to him before his conviction. As between A and C, the judgment against B is irrelevant.
(c) A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B. C, B's son, murders A in consequence. The existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for a crime.
(d) A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue.
(e) A is tried for the murder of B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that A was convicted and sentenced is relevant under section 6 as showing the motive for the fact in issue.
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 34 Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial
Section 35 Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc. jurisdiction
Section 37 Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36 when relevant
Section 38 Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved