All you need to know about section 9 of Indian Evidence Act



    The 1872 Indian Evidence Act controls statements made in front of a court of law and allows or compels witnesses to present them in conjunction with the facts under inquiry. Sir James Fitzjames Stephen drafted the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. The Act’s purpose is to provide criteria for the kind of evidence that can be admitted in Indian courts. Admissions, testimonies, oral evidence, documentary evidence, legal presumption, the burden of proof, estoppel, and all other topics affecting the acquisition of evidence and admissibility of problems on which the court must record its remarks are covered by the Act.

    The Indian Evidence Act of 1872, Section 9, deals with facts that must be explained or submitted as a point of contention in a case. What facts are essential, what facts are to be given as facts in the problem, and what facts are significant are all discussed in this section. The notion would be clearer if there was an example. ‘Akhil,’ for instance, accused ‘Bhaskar,’ of stabbing ‘Chandran.’ The facts given by ‘Akhil’ are required in this case. The facts were provided by ‘Bhaskar,’ who claimed that he did not kill ‘Chandran,’ which is the subject of the case, i.e. the facts in question.

    What is the Indian Evidence Act, 1972, Section 9?

    According to Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, the following facts are required to explain or exhibit relevant facts in the case before the court:

    1. Facts that must be explained, or
    2. Introducing a fact in controversy, or
    3. Relevant facts to be produced in regard to the matter before the court, or
    4. The facts that can be supported, or
    5. The facts that are rebutted as a result of an inference drawn from a fact at controversy, or
    6. The fact that establishes the identity of anything or anyone whose identity is relevant, or
    7. The facts that determine the time or location at which any issue or relevant fact happened, or
    8. The fact that demonstrates the connection of persons by whom any such fact was transacted are significant to the degree that they are necessary for that purpose.

    Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1972 defines its scope.

    Facts to Explain

    Certain evidence has little value when seen in isolation, but it becomes meaningful when analysed in conjunction with other facts in a case. These are important or relevant facts that must be presented properly.

    Consider the case below: Alexander tried to kidnap a young lady. The accused was spotted roaming about near the police station during the police investigation. When the girl saw the accused, she broke down in tears in front of her brother, who called police. The police took the accused into custody. The girl’s comment speaks for itself.

    Basic information

    When facts serve as a prelude to an important fact, they aid in comprehending the real nature of a major transaction. Evidence is allowed solely to the extent that it is utilised to introduce important facts or facts in the dispute.

    Inference-supporting facts

    This kind of fact isn’t as important as facts in an issue or relevant facts, but it does support or contradict the conclusion drawn from the facts in the problem or relevant facts.

    When ‘A’ murders ‘B,’ for example, ‘A’ seeks to depart the community. The fact that he managed to leave is evidence of his guilt in the crime he committed. This is an important information to remember.

    Facts refute assumptions.

    The fact might be rebutted or refuted to the facts in the problem using inferences or pertinent facts.

    Facts that determine a thing’s or person’s identity

    When identifying a thing’s identity, relevant facts are information that is most helpful in determining that thing’s identity.

    For instance, when ‘A’ commits a theft that results in a murder, the housekeeper is tasked with identifying the stolen and murdered things. The deceased’s clothing and shoes can be used to identify them. If a neighbour who attended a party at the victim’s home recognised the victim’s jewellery, it is appropriate.

    Person identification:

    Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 covers person identification. Identification may be done by parents, siblings, wives, or other relatives when a person’s identity is being probed in a relevant subject. A physical mark, symbol, or any wound on the body can be used to identify someone in some instances. Bones, skeletons, age, voice, and other medical exams are also used to identify a person.

    Due to the finding of handwriting, finger and footprint prints, and other indicators, expert identification is possible. To identify a person, several approaches and procedures are employed. The identification test is intended to aid the investigating agency. When family members are unable to identify the gold that belonged to a deceased person, the gold’s owner is able to. It will be determined whether or not his evidence can be believed. If family members have lost their memory, it is tough to disregard the diamonds. In court, identification evidence is deemed substantial.

    Parade of Test Identification (TIP)

    The ‘Test Identification Parade’ is one method of determining the accused’s identification. The tests’ objective is to allow an eyewitness to the crime to identify the accused in front of the Magistrate. The test’s identification is critically necessary. The purpose of test identification is for the prosecution to decide who can be called an eyewitness and to evaluate an eyewitness’ memories. In such cases, the court may examine identification or supporting evidence. It would be difficult to accept an accused’s identification by a juvenile witness without confirmation in court, or an accused’s first-time identification by a witness without confirmation.


    Rajasthan State v. Heera (2007)

    Dacoity is involved in this instance in respect to a parade test identification. Seven dacoits stormed into a Petrol pump office in the middle of the night to steal money while the staff were asleep. The workers were beaten with lathis by the three dacoits who entered the office. Hearing the worker’s pleas, a close neighbour arrived and was also thrashed by the hoodlums. The crooks fled after stealing money from the cash box. Thirty-seven witnesses were interrogated during the trial. A Test Identification of Parade was used to identify the culprits.

    State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajnath Singh, Mahatim Singh, Ram Manam, Munnu Alias Monu (1978)

    This case includes dacoity in connection with a Parade Test Identification. Four dacoits break into Sheo Shanker Tiwari’s home in Sakkapur hamlet late at night. They stormed into the house, armed with a rifle, a knife, and lathis. They also had candles with them. While the family was sleeping, the dacoits bound them to their beds. The daicots were threatening them with guns. They stole goods and fled the house. They tracked down one of the crooks and filed a complaint against him. The identities of the others were unknown to the family, but they were recognised.

    Identification’s worth

    Identification is advantageous to both the investigating agency and the accused. Even if the witness has no connection to the accused, if a test identification parade is held as quickly as feasible, he may be able to identify the criminal.

    In court, identification

    The regulation to identify the accused as the identification in court was established by Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872. The person identifying in court and the person identifying in test identification must both affirm the accused’s identity.


    Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 is summarised at the end of the article. The facts are divided into two categories: explanatory and introductory to the important facts or facts at issue. The facts must be clarified or introduced, as well as relevant or supporting of the court’s case. It can also be refuted if an inference is derived from a contested fact, and it can identify anything or anybody connected to the issue’s fact or facts, or when they occur. The information demonstrating the parties’ relationship in the transaction must also be relevant to the facts.

    By identifying facts, several tests are used to decide which facts can be offered as evidence in court. The identification parade test is used to evaluate an eyewitness’ recollection in relation to the accused. The process of identifying an accused person or a deceased person using any marks or an identification examination, or by identifying family members, is known as identification. It may also be identified through photo identification, which police use to identify the culprit from eyewitnesses.

    We hope that this article helped you In some way or another! For more such information, follow us on InstagramFacebookTwitterYoutubeTelegram, or simply subscribe to our newsletter.


    (MARCH – APRIL 2022)


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here