Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 39 BSA 2023: Opinions of Experts

Section 39 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with the relevance of expert opinions when a Court must form an opinion on matters requiring special knowledge, including foreign law, science, art, handwriting, finger impressions, and electronic or digital evidence.

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024.

On this page Meaning of Section 39 Statutory text Electronic evidence Practical effect Related provisions

What Section 39 BSA means

Expert evidence becomes relevant when the Court is required to decide a matter that depends on specialised knowledge outside ordinary judicial experience. A person specially skilled in the relevant field may give an opinion, and Section 39 recognises that opinion as a relevant fact.

  • Foreign law: an expert may assist the Court on the content or effect of foreign law.
  • Science or art: medical, forensic, technical, scientific and other specialised opinions may be relevant.
  • Other specialised fields: the provision is broad enough to cover other fields requiring special skill or knowledge.
  • Handwriting and finger impressions: expert comparison and identification opinions are expressly recognised.
  • Electronic or digital evidence: the opinion of an Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is expressly made relevant.

Section 39 - Opinions of experts

(1) When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or any other field, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or any other field, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts and such persons are called experts.

Illustrations

(a) The question is whether the death of A was caused by poison. Expert opinion regarding the symptoms produced by the suspected poison is relevant.

(b) Where the issue concerns whether A, because of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of understanding the nature or wrongfulness of an act, expert opinion concerning the symptoms and effects of such mental condition is relevant.

(c) Where the question is whether a document was written by A, expert comparison with another document proved or admitted to have been written by A is relevant.

(2) When, in a proceeding, the Court has to form an opinion on a matter relating to information transmitted or stored in a computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is a relevant fact.

Explanation: For the purposes of sub-section (2), an Examiner of Electronic Evidence is treated as an expert.

Important: Section 39 belongs to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, not the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Practical effect of expert opinion under Section 39

Section 39 makes expert opinion relevant, but relevance does not automatically make the opinion conclusive. The Court may evaluate the expert's qualifications, the material examined, the method used, the reasons given, the consistency of the opinion with other evidence, and the facts supporting or contradicting it.

This should also be read with Section 40 BSA, which deals with facts bearing upon opinions of experts. Such facts may support or be inconsistent with the expert opinion and may therefore assist the Court in assessing its evidentiary value.