Relevancy and Admissibility

Relevancy and admissibility are fundamental concepts within the realm of legal evidence, playing a crucial role in the administration of justice. These concepts are particularly outlined and governed by statutes such as the Indian Evidence Act, which provides a framework for the admission and consideration of evidence in legal proceedings.

Relevancy

Relevancy in the context of legal evidence refers to the significance and connection of a particular piece of information or evidence to the issues at hand in a legal case. The central idea is that relevant evidence makes the existence of a fact more or less probable than it would be without that evidence. While the Indian Evidence Act does not explicitly define relevancy, it outlines in Sections 5 to 55 the various ways in which facts may be associated with one another, forming the basis for determining relevance.

At its core, relevancy acts as a crucial link between a statement of proof and the statement that needs to be proved. This link is established by demonstrating an association between different facts, as stipulated in the provisions of the Evidence Act. Two fundamental principles guide the application of relevancy: firstly, nothing should be admitted if it is not logically verified in relation to the matters that need proof and secondly, everything that is verified and probative should be admitted unless clear legal grounds exclude it.

The exclusion of relevant evidence is possible under certain circumstances. A court may choose to bar relevant evidence if its probative value is outweighed significantly by the risks of unfair bias, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, undue delay or the unnecessary presentation of cumulative proof. This careful balancing ensures that the admission of evidence serves the interests of justice and the fair determination of facts.

The Indian Evidence Act, through Sections 5 to 55, provides a comprehensive framework for understanding when one fact is relevant to another. It identifies specific manners in which facts may be associated and if a fact is not so connected, it is deemed irrelevant. Thus, relevancy, as per the Act, is not a subjective determination but is grounded in the specified ways in which facts can be linked in a legal context.

Admissibility

Admissibility, on the other hand, is the acceptance of relevant evidence by the court. All relevant facts that meet the criteria established by the legal framework are considered admissible. The final discretion on the admissibility of evidence lies with the judge, as outlined in Section 136 of the Evidence Act.

When a party proposes to present evidence, the judge has the authority to inquire about how the alleged truth, when illustrated, would be relevant. This inquiry ensures that the evidence presented is not only relevant but also aligned with the legal requirements for admissibility. The judge will admit the evidence only if convinced that it is relevant under the provisions of Sections 6 to 55 of the Evidence Act.

The essential ingredients of admissibility include the judge’s sole authority in determining both relevancy and admissibility. When an individual proposes to show proof of any fact, the judge may ask for an explanation of how the fact is relevant. The judge will admit the particular demonstrated reality only if satisfied with the individual’s response, ensuring that the evidence is not only relevant but also admissible within the legal framework.

Difference Between Relevancy and Admissibility: An In-depth Analysis

Here, we delve into the differences between relevancy and admissibility, exploring various aspects that highlight their unique characteristics.

1. Definition of Relevancy and Admissibility

Relevance:

Relevance refers to the logical and consequential connection between facts, where the existence or non-existence of one set of facts is likely based on the normal course of events or human behaviour. It hinges on the inherent relationship between facts, emphasising their logical connection.

Admissibility:

Admissibility, on the other hand, relates to the status of facts that have been declared legally significant under the Indian Evidence Act. It denotes the eligibility of evidence for consideration in court, determined by adherence to legal rules rather than inherent logical connections.

Case- Ram Bihari v State of Bihar

In this case, the supreme court observed that relevancy and admissibility are synonyms to each other but their legal implications are different from each other and the admissible facts may not be relevant.

2. Basis of Relevancy and Admissibility

Relevance:

The basis for establishing relevance lies in logic and human experience. It is grounded in the natural association between facts and the understanding that certain facts make the existence of others more or less probable.

Admissibility:

Admissibility is based on legal principles. It is not determined by the inherent connection between facts but rather by their conformity with the legal rules outlined in the Evidence Act.

3. Legal Framework

Relevance:

Provisions regarding relevancy are extensively discussed under Section 5 to 55 of the Indian Evidence Act. These sections outline the various ways in which facts may be associated, forming the basis for determining relevance.

Admissibility:

The legal framework for admissibility is primarily discussed under Section 56 of the Indian Evidence Act. This section specifies the criteria that make evidence legally acceptable in a court of law.

4. Emphasis

Relevance:

Emphasis in relevance lies on what facts are necessary to prove before the court. It directs attention to the logical connection between facts and their significance in establishing a case.

Admissibility:

Emphasis in admissibility focuses on what facts are admissible and what facts are not. The consideration here is more aligned with legal criteria than with the inherent relevance of the evidence.

5. Role

Relevance:

Relevance acts as a decisive factor in determining what is crucial for the court to consider. It guides the court in deciding which evidence is logically connected to the issues at hand.

Admissibility:

Admissibility is more of an effect, determining whether the evidence meets the legal criteria for acceptance. It is a consequence of facts being in accordance with the legal rules specified in the Evidence Act.

6. Nature of Relevancy and Admissibility

Relevance:

The nature of relevance is essentially a cause. It determines the logical connection between facts and their impact on the understanding of the case.

Admissibility:

The nature of admissibility is essentially an effect. It is the result of facts meeting the legal requirements outlined in the Evidence Act, indicating whether evidence is fit for consideration.

7. Discretion

Relevance:

The court has the power to apply discretion in determining the relevance of facts. This discretion allows for flexibility in interpretation based on the specific circumstances of each case.

Admissibility:

Unlike relevance, the court does not have the same level of discretion in admissibility. Admissibility is determined by adherence to legal rules and the court has less room for subjective interpretation.

8. Relation to Proof

Relevance:

Relevant facts are crucial in building a case and influencing the determination of legal truths. They act as a bridge between the evidence presented and the facts that need to be established.

Admissibility:

Admissible facts may or may not be relevant. Legal relevant facts, however, are admissible, indicating a subset of admissible facts that are also relevant in a legal sense.

Here’s a table summarising the differences between relevancy and admissibility:

Conclusion

Relevancy and admissibility are intricately connected concepts that form the bedrock of the legal system’s approach to evidence. Relevancy establishes the nexus between facts, while admissibility ensures that only relevant evidence meeting specified criteria is considered by the court in the pursuit of justice and the determination of legal truths.

The careful interplay between these concepts of relevancy and admissibility is essential for maintaining the integrity and fairness of legal proceedings.