Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is the short title, extent, and commencement section. It states that:
This Act may be called the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It extends to the whole of India (except the State of Jammu and Kashmir) and applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, other than Courts-martial convened under the Army Act (44 & 45 Vict., c. 58), the Naval Discipline Act (29 & 30 Vict., c. 109) or the Indian Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934 (34 of 1934) but not to affidavits presented to any Court or Officer, nor to proceedings before an arbitrator; and it shall come into force on the first day of September 1872.
Here are some case laws that have interpreted Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 in a conceptual manner:
• State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad (AIR 1961 SC 181): This case held that Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applies to all judicial proceedings, including criminal trials.
Puranmal v. Dwarkadas (AIR 1941 PC 144): In the case of Puranmal v. Dwarkadas (AIR 1941 PC 144), the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council held that the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 does not apply to arbitration proceedings. The Court held that the words “all judicial proceedings” in Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are wide enough to include arbitration proceedings, but that the Act was not intended to apply to arbitration proceedings.
The Court held that the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a procedural statute and that procedural statutes are not generally applied to arbitration proceedings. The Court held that arbitration proceedings are a form of alternative dispute resolution and that the parties to an arbitration agreement are free to choose their own rules of procedure.
The decision of the Judicial Committee in Puranmal v. Dwarkadas (AIR 1941 PC 144) has been followed by subsequent cases. The decision has been cited in a number of other cases, including:
• K.P. Varghese v. State of Kerala (1975) 2 SCC 525
• State of Karnataka v. M.N. Krishna Murthy (2002) 1 SCC 151
• State of Andhra Pradesh v. P.V.S.R. Prasad (2005) 6 SCC 197
.
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Singh (AIR 1968 SC 1428): The case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Singh (AIR 1968 SC 1428) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of India in 1968. The case concerned the applicability of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to proceedings before a Court-martial.
The appellant in the case, Ram Singh, was a soldier who was tried by a Court-martial and convicted of murder. He appealed the conviction to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Court-martial had not followed the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The Court held that the words “all judicial proceedings” in Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are wide enough to include proceedings before a Court-martial.
The Court also held that the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a beneficial piece of legislation and should be construed liberally. The Court held that the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 should be applied to proceedings before a Court-martial in order to ensure that the accused is given a fair trial.
The decision of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Singh (AIR 1968 SC 1428) has been followed by subsequent cases. The decision has been cited in a number of other cases, including:
• State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh (AIR 1972 SC 1342)
• State of U.P. v. Ram Swarup (AIR 1973 SC 2414)
• State of Maharashtra v. Baburao (AIR 1981 SC 839)
The decision of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Singh (AIR 1968 SC 1428) is an important precedent on the applicability of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to proceedings before a Court-martial. The decision ensures that the accused in a Court-martial trial is given a fair trial by ensuring that the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are applied.
Multiple choice questions related to Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
1. Which of the following is not a judicial proceeding?
• trial in a criminal court
• hearing in a civil court
• An arbitration proceeding
• military court-martial
o The answer is “An arbitration proceeding is not a judicial proceeding.”
2. Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applies to all of the following except:
Proceedings in a Court-martial
Proceedings before an arbitrator
Proceedings in a criminal trial
Proceedings in a civil trial
The answer is “Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 does not apply to proceedings before an arbitrator”.
3. Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 came into force on:
January 1, 1873
September 1, 1872
October 1, 1872
November 1, 1872
o The answer is “Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 came into force on September 1, 1872.”
References & citation:-
https://www.indiacode.nic.in/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Evidence_Act
State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad (AIR 1961 SC 181
• State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh (AIR 1972 SC 1342)
• State of U.P. v. Ram Swarup (AIR 1973 SC 2414)
• State of Maharashtra v. Baburao (AIR 1981 SC 839)
• Puranmal v. Dwarkadas (AIR 1941 PC 144):
• State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ram Singh (AIR 1968 SC 1428)
