Section 34 – Entries in Books of Account
1. Concept and Purpose
Section 34 deals with entries in books of account, whether manual or electronic, made in the regular course of business. These are considered relevant facts, but not sufficient on their own to fix liability on any person. This provision recognizes the importance of routine financial records in business but prevents misuse by requiring corroboration.
2. Essential Conditions for Admissibility
For such entries to be relevant under Section 34:
- The entries must be made in books of account.
- The books must be regularly kept in the course of business.
- The entries must relate to a matter under judicial inquiry.
- The form can be electronic or written.
If all these conditions are met, the court may consider the entries as relevant evidence. However, a person cannot be held liable merely on the basis of these entries — there must be independent supporting evidence.
Example: A ledger book maintained by a shopkeeper showing that B owes ₹10,000 will not be sufficient unless B admits it or other proof exists, like a signed receipt or delivery note.
3. Judicial Interpretation
In Central Bureau of Investigation v. V.C. Shukla, the Supreme Court held that entries on loose sheets of paper are not books of account and have no evidentiary value unless they are part of a regularly maintained record. The court emphasized the need for authentication and supporting proof.
In Kundan Lal Rallaram v. Custodian, Evacuee Property, the court clarified that books of account are admissible, but the entry must be shown to be accurate and truthful through corroboration.
4. Nature of Evidence
- Entries are relevant, not conclusive.
- They require corroboration, particularly in cases where liability is in question.
- The court looks at who made the entry, when it was made, and whether it was made in the normal course of business.
Section 35 – Public Records Made in Discharge of Official Duty
1. Concept and Scope
Section 35 permits the use of statements or entries made in public or official records by public servants in the course of their official duties. Such entries are relevant and admissible, even if the person who made them is not called as a witness.
The law recognizes that official records are presumed to be accurate, as they are made under legal obligation and are open to public scrutiny.
2. Key Conditions
To be admissible:
- The entry must state a fact in issue or a relevant fact.
- The entry must be made in a public or official record.
- The person making it must be a public servant, or a person legally required to maintain such a record.
- The entry must be made in the discharge of official duty.
3. Examples
- Birth and death registers
- Land revenue records
- Service records of employees
- School admission and attendance records
These documents are generally accepted without needing to call the official as a witness.
Example: A birth certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation is admissible to prove age, unless serious doubts are raised about its authenticity.
4. Judicial Approach
In Sturla v. Freccia, the court emphasized that public records are prepared by neutral authorities and carry a presumption of correctness.
Indian courts apply the same principle and allow such records to be introduced as evidence even without calling the public servant who prepared them — provided the record appears genuine, regular, and official.
Section 36 – Statements in Maps, Charts, and Plans
1. Legal Provision and Purpose
Section 36 declares that statements of facts in issue or relevant facts made in:
- Published maps or charts generally offered for public sale, or
- Maps or plans prepared under the authority of the Central or State Government
shall be treated as relevant facts in judicial proceedings.
This section recognizes that such documents, although they may seem like hearsay, are often reliable due to the method of their preparation, government authority, or public nature.
2. Two Categories of Admissible Documents
This section classifies admissible documents into two types:
a) Maps or Charts Offered for Public Sale
- These include printed geographical maps, railway route maps, atlases, and maritime charts.
- Their relevance comes from public availability and exposure to scrutiny.
- Courts may presume their authorship and date of publication, but not their accuracy, unless proved otherwise.
b) Government Maps or Plans
- These are maps created by official agencies like the Survey of India, Municipal Corporations, or Land Revenue Departments.
- These documents enjoy a stronger presumption of accuracy under Section 83 of the Indian Evidence Act.
- However, if such documents were prepared for a specific legal dispute, the presumption does not extend to accuracy, and the producing party must prove their correctness.
3. Judicial Interpretation
In Dwijesh Chandra Roy v. Naresh Chandra Gupta, it was held that a map is essentially a pictorial statement by its maker. If the maker is not called as a witness, and the map is not in the public domain or officially made, it becomes inadmissible hearsay.
The Court may use Section 87 to presume the correctness of such maps in terms of authorship and date, but not accuracy if the source is private.
4. Limitations and Clarifications
- Private maps or charts created for internal or temporary use (e.g., by a litigant) are not admissible under this section unless the maker proves them.
- Charts used in navigation, such as maritime maps, if published officially, may still carry strong evidentiary weight (as held in Re Drachenfels, 1900).
- Section 36 is primarily aimed at documents that are objective, not influenced by litigation, and are official or widely available.
Section 37 – Statements of Fact of Public Nature in Acts or Notifications
1. Legal Framework
Section 37 allows the use of statements from:
- Central or State legislation
- Acts of Parliament
- Government Notifications
- Official Gazettes
These are relevant when the court needs to form an opinion on facts of public nature.
The section serves a practical need: courts should not waste time proving public facts that are already documented and accessible in official records.
2. Meaning of “Public Nature”
The term "public nature" includes:
- Declarations of disturbed areas
- Notifications of natural disasters
- Classification of tribes, castes, or communities
- Economic or legal policies that affect a class of citizens
Example: A Gazette notification stating that a district is drought-affected can be used to prove the fact without calling any officer to testify.
3. Judicial Caution
In one case, the Supreme Court rejected the idea that a Gazette notification showing that some Dhangar families had migrated to Ahmednagar could be taken as evidence of all Dhangars being migrants in that area. The court emphasized that:
- Such documents are relevant, but not always conclusive.
- Courts must assess whether the fact in question is truly public in nature, and not an individual private fact.
4. Relation with Section 81
While Section 37 speaks of relevancy, Section 81 of the Act creates a presumption of genuineness for these official records. But even then:
- Courts are not bound to accept the truth of statements blindly.
- The document must relate to a fact of public nature, not private assertions.
Section 38 – Statements as to Foreign Law
1. Legal Basis
Section 38 states that when a court has to form an opinion about foreign law, the following sources are relevant:
- Any book of law printed or published under the authority of the foreign government.
- Any report of court rulings from foreign countries, printed or published officially.
This provision is crucial for cases involving international commercial law, marriages under foreign jurisdictions, or cross-border inheritance.
2. Conditions for Admissibility
- The book must purport to contain foreign law.
- It must be printed or published under government authority of that country.
- Similarly, judgments of foreign courts must come from recognized official reports.
If these conditions are fulfilled, courts can refer to them directly, without requiring expert testimony in every case.
3. Limitations and Judicial Standards
- Unauthorized translations are not admissible.
- If there's any doubt about authenticity, the party must produce an expert on foreign law under Section 45.
- Courts prefer expert evidence, especially when the foreign law is ambiguous, unwritten, or subject to interpretation.
In Christien v. Delanney, the court refused to rely on an unauthorized translation of the French Civil Code, noting that only officially sanctioned books are admissible.
4. Practical Use
Foreign law is treated as a matter of fact in Indian courts. Hence:
- It must be pleaded, proved, and supported by evidence.
- Section 38 helps reduce this burden by allowing documentary proof when available.
5. Interplay with Other Provisions of BSA
- Section 26 (Dying Declarations): A conviction based solely on a dying declaration must be scrutinized — if it was admitted fraudulently, the judgment can be reopened.
- Section 15–25 (Admissions): A judgment based only on unchallenged admissions may still be challenged if the admission was fraudulent or involuntary.
- Section 81 (Presumption of Genuineness): Applies to certified copies of judgments; however, genuineness does not mean the judgment is valid if procured by fraud.
6. Practical Scenarios for the BSA Exam
Scenario 1: Repeating a Dispute Already Decided
If a party files a second suit over a matter previously adjudicated, the opposing party may cite the earlier judgment under Section 34, making it relevant to show the court must not take cognizance again.
Scenario 2: Challenging a Divorce Decree
A person may challenge a divorce decree obtained by the spouse in another state, claiming fraudulent jurisdiction and misrepresentation. Under Section 38, such a decree may be treated as invalid if proven.
Scenario 3: Will and Property Dispute
A probate order is produced to establish that a deceased person left a valid will. Under Section 35, the judgment is conclusive unless set aside for fraud.
Conclusion: Judicial Consistency, Finality, and Fairness
Sections 36 to 38 of the BSA 2023 form an important exception to the general rule of direct evidence and oral testimony. They recognise that certain documentary statements, due to their official nature, widespread availability, or public importance, can be trusted and relied upon, even if not proved in the usual manner.
However, courts apply judicial caution, especially when:
- The documents relate to a specific dispute.
- The maps or charts are made for litigation.
- Foreign legal texts are not officially verified.
These sections streamline evidence law and ensure the efficient use of trustworthy public materials in judicial decisions.