Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 6 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction. — Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places. Illustrations

(a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the by-standers at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact.

(b) A is accused of waging war against the 1[Government of India] by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked, and goals are broken open. The occurrence of these facts is relevant, as forming part of the general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of them.

(c) A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel arose, and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained, are relevant facts, though they do not contain the libel itself.

(d) The question is, whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered to A. The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively. Each delivery is a relevant fact.

India's Important Case Laws and Landmark Judgments on Evidence Act i.e. Section 6 Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

• State Of Maharashtra vs Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari on 14 March, 2013 Supreme Court of India 
• Sukhar vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 1 October, 1999 Supreme Court of India 
• Anand Singh & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 28 July, 2010 Supreme Court of India 
• Bairon Singh vs State Of M.P on 29 May, 2009 Supreme Court of India 
• Krishan Kumar Malik vs State Of Haryana on 4 July, 2011 Supreme Court of India 
• Vijatabai & Ors vs Shriram Tukaram & Ors on 20 November, 1998 Supreme Court of India 
• Vijatabai & Ors vs Shriram Tukaram & Ors on 20 November, 1998 Supreme Court of India 
• Narayan Govind Gavate Etc vs State Of Maharashtra on 11 October, 1976 Supreme Court of India 
• Kehar Singh & Ors vs State (Delhi Admn.) on 3 August, 1988 Supreme Court of India 
• Anand Singh & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 28 July, 2010 Supreme Court of India 
• Vishal Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 2 April, 2014 Delhi High Court 
• State vs Surajdeo Sinha And Anr. on 2 July, 1953 Patna High Court 
• Gunreddy Ramkoti Reddy And Others vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 April, 2014 Andhra High Court  
• State Of Maharashtra vs Kamal Ahmed Mohd. Vakil Ansari on 14 March, 2013 Supreme Court of India 
• Identification Of Prisoners Act, 1920 Law Commission Report 
• Marri Narasayya And Ors. vs Peruri Krishnamurthi on 6 August, 1928 Madras High Court 
• Court-Ii vs By Public Prosecutor on 7 May, 2010 Kerala High Court 
• Parbhoo And Ors. vs Emperor on 16 September, 1941 Allahabad High Court