Meaning of Res Gestae:
The term 'Res' is
a Latin word which means "thing" and the expression "Res
Gestae" literally which means “the thing done, a subject matter, a
transaction or essential circumstances surrounding the subject". In the law of evidence, it means things done
including words spoken, forming part of the same transaction. There is a fact
story behind every case before the court of law. In (fact story) contains
certain acts, omissions or statements, which are not in issue but are capable of
throwing some light on the nature of the transaction revealing its true quality
and character. Such acts, omissions, or statements from part of the same
transaction in issue and are allowed to be proved.
Definition of Res Gestae:
Halsbury
defines 'Res gaste' as "Facts which form part of the res gestae and are
consequently provable as facts relevant
to the issue ; include acts , declarations and incidents which themselves
constitute or accompany and explain the facts or transaction in issue.
S. 6
embodies the rule of Admission of Evidence know as Res gestae. This phrase
means simply a transaction, thing done, subject matter Res gestae of any case
properly consist of that portion of actual happening of the world out of the rights
or liability, complained or asserted in the proceeding, necessarily, arise. The
principle underlying S. 6, is sometimes termed as Res gestae. This phrase of
Res gestae is well established in the law of Evidence. This phrase has been
used in two senses. In the restricted senses it means world's happening out of
which the right or liability in question arises. In the wider sense it covers
all the probative facts by which res gestae are reproduced to the tribunal
where the Direct Evidence of witness or perception by the Court are
unattainable. In restricted meaning Res gestae imports the conception of action
by some person producing the effects for which the liability is sought to be
enforced an action. To be clear, in the restricted sense "facts which constitute
the res gestae must be such as so connected with the very transaction or fact
under investigation as to constitute a part of it." Whatever act or series
of acts constitute, or in point of time immediately accompany and terminate in.
The principle Act charged as an offence against the accused from its inception
to its consummation and whatever may be said by either of the parties during
the continuance of the transaction, with reference to it, including herein what
may be said by the suffering party, though in absence of the accused during the
continuance of the action or the latter, from part of the principle transaction
and may be given in Evidence as part of Res gestae of it. While, on the other
hand, statements made by the complaining party, after all action on the part of
wrong-doer has ceased and some time has elapsed do not form part of Res gestae
and should be excluded.
The acts and
Declarations accompanying the transaction or the facts in issue are treated as
Res gestae and admitted in Evidence. But the fact deposed must form part of the
transaction and must be made at the same time with the act immediately after
it.
Relevant Case Law:
Supreme Court in
Punjabrao v. D P Meshram, AIR 1965 SC 1179, held that the Evidence of the
conversion of a member of Scheduled Caste to Buddhism may be Corroborated by
the Evidence of his conduct subsequent to his conversion. In Pershadi v. State
, AIR 1957 SC 211, held that in a case of murder soon after the murder the
accused who had earlier held out of a threat to the victim told the father of
the victim that he had a hand in this appearance of the accused, is Admissible
u/s. 6 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Supreme Court in
Chander Kala v. Ram Kishan, AIR SC 1268, held that when the complainant
narrated the incident to the relative of the deceased and he deposed to that
effect in Court, such Evidence is Admissible in Evidence.
In state of Andhra
Pradesh v. Panna Satyanarayan, AIR 2000 SC 2138 , held that when the accused
murdered his wife and daughter, the statement by the father of the deceased
wife that father of the accused told him on telephone that his son has killed
the deceased. Absence of a finding as to whatever information given by
accused's father to the deceased's father that the accused had killed the
deceased was either of the time of commission of the crime or immediately
thereafter. So as to form the part of the same transaction, the statement
cannot be considered as relevant u/s. 6.
In Mahendra pal v.
State, AIR 1955 All. 328, the place where a murder was committed by number of
persons apart from the deceased and witnesses. Those came up immediately after
and were informed by the eye witnesses as to who the two culprits had been. The
statements of those persons were held to be Admissible u/s, 6.
Conditions:
A Statement to be admissible under Section.6, the following
conditions are to be satisfied:
1) The statement must be a statement of fact and not opinion
2) The statement must have been made by a participant or
witness of the transaction.
3) The statement made by bystander is Admissible, if he was
present at the scene of the offense.
4) The statement must explain, elucidate or characterize the
incident in the same manner.
ThnkTh it's really helpful
ReplyDeleteThanks it's really helpful
ReplyDeleteThis notes is very helpful , thank you sir for publishing this . we also provide notes related to law you can check it out by clicking the given link below -
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theinfobell.com/