QANUN-E-SHAHADAT ORDER, 1984

Exact source transcription retained, including print layout and extraction artifacts. Text SHA-256: d0e15d3c2951cc1d4b6be27a4a3ac69027a668060d2aa1f2d800f0663b8f15b8.

QANUN-E-SHAHADAT ORDER, 1984  
(X of 1984) 
CONTENTS 
PART – I 
RELEVANCY OF FACTS 
CHAPTER – I 
PRELIMINARY 
1. Short title, extent and commencement 
2. Interpretation 
CHAPTER II 
OF WITNESSES 
3. Who may testify. 
4. Judges and Magistrates. 
5. Communications during marriage 
6. Evidence as to affairs of State 
7. Official communications 
8. Information as to commission of offences 
9. Professional communications 
10. Article 9 to apply to interpreters, etc. 
11. Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence. 
12. Confidential communications with legal advisers. 
13. Production of title deed of witness, not party 
14. Production of documents which another person, having possession, 
could refuse to produce. 
15.  Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will 
criminate. 
16.  Accomplice 
17.  Competence and number of witnesses. 
 
CHAPTER III 
Of the Relevancy of Facts  
18. Evidence may be given of facts-in-issue and relevant facts. 
19. Relevancy of facts forming part, of same transaction. 
20. Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue. 
21.  Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct. 
22.  Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts. 
23.  Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design. 
24.  When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant. 
25.  In suits for damages facts tending to enable Court to determine amount 
are relevant. 
26.  Facts relevant when right or custom is in question. 
27. Facts showing existence of state of mind or of body, or bodily feelings. 
28. Facts bearing on question Whether act was accidental or intentional. 
29.  Existence of course of business when relevant. 
ADMISSIONS 
30.  Admission defined 
31. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent etc. 
32. Admission by persons whose position must be proved as against party 
to suit 
33. Admission by persons expressly referred to be party to suit 
34. Proof of admissions against person s making them and by or on their 
behalf 
35. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant 
36. Admissions in civil cases when relevant 
37. Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise, when irrelevant in 
criminal proceeding 
38. Confession to police officer not to be proved 
39. Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved 
against him 
40. How much of information received from accused may be proved 
41. Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, 
threat or promise, relevant. 
42. Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of 
promise of secrecy, etc. 
43. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and 
others jointly under trial for same offence. 
44. Accused persons to be liable to cross-examination. 
45. Admission not conclusive proof but may estop. 
STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO CANNOT BE CALLED AS 
WITNESSES 
46. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is deed or 
cannot be found, etc. is relevant, 
47. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in su bsequent proceeding, 
the truth of facts therein stated 
STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES  
48. Entries in books of account when relevant 
49. Relevancy of entry in public record made in performance of duty 
50. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans 
51. Relevancy of statements as to fact of public nature, contained in certain 
Acts or notifications 
52. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law-books 
HOW MUCH OF A STATEMENT IS TO BE PROVED  
53. What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation,  
document, book or series of letters or papers 
JUDGMENTS 0F COURTS OF JUSTICE WHEN RELEVANT  
54. Previous judgments relevant to bar a Second suit or trial. 
55. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc. jurisdiction. 
56. Relevancy and effect of Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those 
mentioned in Article 55. 
57. Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in Articles 54 to 56 when 
relevant 
58. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetence of Court may 
be proved 
OPINION OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT 
59. Opinions of experts. 
60. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts. 
61. Opinion as to handwriting when relevant. 
62. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant. 
63. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant. 
64. Opinion on relationship when relevant. 
65. Grounds of opinion when relevant. 
CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT 
66. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed irrelevant. 
67. In criminal cases previous good character relevant. 
68. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply. 
69. Character as affecting damages. 
CHAPTER IV 
OF ORAL EVIDENCE 
70. Proof of facts by oral evidence. 
71. Oral evidence must be direct. 
CHAPTER V 
OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 
72. Proof of contents of documents. 
73. Primary evidence. 
74. Secondary evidence. 
75. Proof of documents by primary evidence. 
76. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be 
given. 
77. Rules as to notice to produce. 
78. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or 
written document produced. 
79. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested. 
80. Proof where no attesting witness found. 
81. Admission of execution by party to attested document. 
82. Proof when attesting witness denies the execution. 
83. Proof of document not required by law to be attested. 
84. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved. 
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS 
85. Public documents. 
86. Private documents. 
87. Certified copies of public documents. 
88. Proof of documents by production of certified copies. 
89. Proof of other public documents. 
PRESUMPTION AS TO DOCUMENTS 
90. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies. 
91. Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence. 
92. Presumption as to genuineness of documents kept under any law. 
93. Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government. 
94. Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decision. 
95. Presumption as to powers-of-attorney. 
96. Presumption as to certified copies of foreign Judicial records. 
97. Presumption as to books, maps and charts 
98. Presumption as to telegraphic messages 
99. Presumption as to due execution etc., of documents not produced. 
100. Presumption as to documents thirty years old. 
101. Certified copies of documents thirty years old. 
CHAPTER VI 
OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE  
102. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other disposition of proper ty 
reduced to form of document. 
103. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement 
104. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts 
105. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts 
106. Evidence as to application of language can apply to one only of several 
persons 
107. Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts to 
neither of which the whole correctly applies 
108. Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc. 
109. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document 
110. Saving of provisions of Succession Act relating to wills 
PART 11 
ON PROOF 
CHAPTER VII 
FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED  
111. Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved. 
112. Facts of which Court must take judicial notice. 
113. Facts admitted need not be proved 
CHAPTER VIII 
ESTOPPEL 
114. Estoppel 
115. Estoppel of tenant: and of licensee of person in possession 
116. Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee 
 
 
 
PART III 
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE  
CHAPTER IX 
OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF 
117. Burden of proof. 
118. On whom burden of proof lies. 
119. Burden of proof as to particular fact. 
120. Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible. 
121. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions. 
122. Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge. 
123. Burden of proving death o f person known to have been alive within 
thirty years. 
124. Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for 
seven years. 
125. Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord a nd 
tenant, principal and agent. 
126. Burden of proof as to ownership. 
127. Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of 
active confidence. 
128. Birth during marriage conclusive proof of legitimacy 
129. Court may presume existence of certain facts. 
CHAPTER X 
OF THE EXAMINATION OF WITNESS  
130. Order of production and examination of witnesses. 
131. Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence. 
132. Examination-in-chief, etc. 
133. Order of examinations. 
134. Cross-examination of person called to produce a document. 
135. Witnesses to character. 
136. Leading questions. 
137. When leading questions must not be asked. 
138. When leading questions may be asked. 
139. Evidence as to matters in writing. 
140. Cross-examination as to previous Statements in writing. 
141. Questions lawful in cross-examination. 
142. When witness to be compelled to answer. 
143. Court to decide when question shall be asked and when wi tness 
compelled to.answer 
144. Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds 
145. Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable 
grounds 
146. Indecent and scandalous question 
147. Procedure of Court in cases of defamation, libel and slander 
148. Questions intended to insult or annoy 
149. Exclusion of evidence to contract answer to questions testing veracity 
150. Question by party to his own witness 
151. Impeaching credit of witness 
152. Questions lending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact admissible 
153. Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later 
testimony as to.same fact. 
154. When matters may be proved in connection with proved statement 
relevant under.Article 46 or 47. 
155. Refreshing memory 
156. Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in Article 155 
157. Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory 
158. Production of documents 
159. Giving, as evidence, of document called for and produced on notice 
160. Using, as evidence, of document production of which was refused on 
notice 
161. Judge’s power to put questions or order production 
CHAPTER XI 
OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE  
162. No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence 
CHAPTER XII 
DECISION OF CASE ON THE BASIS OF OATH  
163. Acceptance or denial of claim on oath 
CHAPTER XIII 
MISCELLANEOUS 
164. Production of evidence that has become available because of modern 
devices, etc. 
165. Order to override other laws 
166. Repeal 
 
TEXT 
THE QANUN-E-SHAHADAT, 1984 
PRESIDENTS ORDER NO. 10 OF 1984 
[28th October, 1984] 
Preamble.– WHEREAS it is expedient to revise, amend and consolidate the law of  
evidence so as to bring it in conformity with the injunctions of Islam as laid down in  
the Holy Quran and Sunnah;  
NOW, THEREFORE , in pursuance of the Proclamation of the fifth day of July, 
1977, and in  exercise of all powers enabling him in that behalf, the President is 
pleased to make the following Order:– 
PART I 
RELEVANCY OF FACTS 
CHAPTER I 
PRELIMINARY 
1. Short title, extent and commencement .– (1) This order may be called the 
Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. 
(2) It extends to the whole of Pakistan and applies to all judicial 
proceedings in or  before any Court, including a court martial, a tribunal or other 
authority exercising judicial or quasi judicial powers or Jurisdiction, but does not 
apply to proceedings before an arbitrator. 
(3) It shall come into force at once. 
2. Interpretation.– (1) In this Order, unless there is anything repugnant in the 
subject or context,– 
(a) “Court” includes a ll Judges and Magistrates, and all persons, except 
arbitrators, legally authorised to take evidence; 
(b) “document” means any matter expressed or described upon any 
substance by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one 
of those means, intended to be  used, or which may be used, for the 
purpose recording that matter; 
Illustrations 
A writing is a document; 
Words printed, lithographed or photographed are documents; 
A map or plan is a document; 
An inscription on a metal plate or stone is a document; 
A caricature is a document. 
(c)  “evidence” includes:– 
(i)  all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made 
before it by witnesses , in relation to matters of fact under inquiry; 
such statements are called oral evidence; and 
(ii)  all documents produced for the inspection of the Court; such 
documents are called documentary evidence; 
(d)  “fact” includes– 
(i)  anything, state of things, or relation of things capable of being 
perceived by the senses; and 
(ii)  any mental condition of which any person is conscious. 
Illustrations 
(a)  That there are certain o bjects arranged in a certain order in a certain 
place, is a fact. 
(b)  That a man heard or saw something, is a fact. 
(c)  That a man said certain words, is a fact. 
(d)  That a man holds a certain opinion, has a certain intention, acts in 
good faith or fraudulently, or uses a particular word in a particular sense, or is or was 
at a specified time conscious of a particular sensation, is a fact. 
(e)  That a man has a certain reputation, is a fact. 
(2)  One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is  connected 
with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Order relating to 
the relevancy of facts. 
(3)  The expression “facts in issue” includes any fact from which, either by 
itself or in  connection with other facts the existence , non-existence, nature or extent 
of any right,  liability, or disability, asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding, 
necessarily follows. 
Explanation.– Whenever, under the provisions of the law for the time being in force  
relating to civil procedure, any Court records on issue of fact, the fact to be asserted 
or denied in the answer to such issue is a fact in issue. 
Illustrations 
A is accused of the murder of B. 
At his trial the following facts may be in issue:– 
that A caused B’s death;  
that A had intended to cause B’s death; 
that A had received grave sudden provocation from B; 
that A, at the time of doing the act which caused B’s death, was by reason of  
unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing its nature. 
(4)  A fact is said to be proved when, after co nsidering the matters before it, 
the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a 
prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the 
supposition that it exists. 
(5)  A fact is said to be d isproved when after considering the matters before 
it, the Court either believes that it does not exist, or considers its non -existence so 
probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, 
to act upon the supposition that it does not exist. 
(6)  A fact is said not to be proved when it is neither proved nor disproved. 
(7)  Whenever it is provided by this Order that the Court may presume a 
fact, it may either regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved, or may  
call for proof of it. 
(8)  Whenever it is directed by this Order that the Court shall presume a 
fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved. 
(9)  When one fact is declared by this  Order to be conclusive proof of 
another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and 
shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it. 
1
[(e) the expression, “automated”, “electronic”, “information”, “information 
system”, “electronic document”, “el ectronic signature”, “advanced electronic 
signature” and “security procedure”, shall bear the meanings given in the Electronic 
Transaction Ordinance, 2002. 
(f) the expression “certificate” , where the context so admits, includes the 
meaning given to it in the Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002] 
CHAPTER II 
OF WITNESSES 
3. Who may testify .– All persons shall be competent to testify unless the Court  
considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or  
from giving rational answ ers to those questions, by tender years, extreme old age,  
disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind: 
Provided that a person shall not be competent to testify if he has been 
convicted by a Court for perjury or giving false evidence: 
Provided further that the provisions of the first proviso shall not apply to a 
person about whom the Court is satisfied that he has repented thereafter and 
mended his ways: 
Provided further that the Court shall determine the competence of a witness in  
accordance with the qualifications prescribed by the injunctions of Islam as laid down  
in the Holy Quran and Sunnah for a witness, and , where such witness is not  
forthcoming, the Court may take the evidence of a witness who may be available. 
Explanation.– A lunatic is not incompetent to testify unless he is prevented by his  
lunacy from understanding the questions put to him and giving rational answers to  
them. 
4.  Judges and Magistrates .– No Judge or Magistrate shall, except upon the 
special order of some C ourt to which he is subordinate, be compelled to answer any 
questions as to his own conduct in Court as Judge or Magistrate, or as to anything 
                                                 
1Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 1; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
which come to his knowledge in Court as such Judge or Magistrate; but he may be 
examined as to  other matters whic h occurred in his presence whilst he was so 
acting. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A, on his trial before the Court of Session, says that a deposition was 
improperly taken by B, the Magistrate. B cannot be compelled to answer questions 
as to this, except upon the special order of a superior Court. 
(b)  A is accused before the Court of Session of having given, false 
evidence before B,  a Magistrate. B cannot be asked what A said , except upon the 
special order of the superior Court. 
(c)  A is accused before the Court of S ession o f attempting to murder a 
police-officer whilst on his trial before B, a Sessions Judge , B may be examined as 
to what occurred. 
5.  Communications during marriage .– No person who is or has been married 
shall be compelled to disclose any communicatio n made to him during marriage by 
any person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall he be permitted to 
disclosed any such communication , unless the person who made it s, or his 
representative-in-interest, consents, except in suits between married perso ns, or 
proceedings in which one  married person is prosecuted for any crime committed 
against the other. 
6.  Evidence as to affairs of State .– No one shall be permitted to give any 
evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to any affairs o f State, 
except with the permission of the officer a s the head of the department concerned, 
who shall give or withhold such permission as he thinks fit. 
Explanation.– In this Article, “official records relating to the affairs of state” includes 
documents c oncerning industrial or commercial activities carried on , directly or  
indirectly, by the Federal Government or a Provincial Government or any statutory  
body or corporation or company set up or controlled by such Government. 
7.  Official communications.– No public officer shall be compelled to disclose  
communications made to him in official confidence, when he considers that the 
public interests would suffer by the disclosure. 
Explanation.– In this Article, “communications” includes communications concerning 
industrial or commercial activities carried on, directly or indirectly, by the Federal  
Government or a Provincial Government or any statutory body or corporation or  
company set up or controlled by such Government. 
8.  Information as to commission of offen ces.– No Magistrate or Police officer 
shall be compelled to say whence he got any information as to the commission of 
any offence, and no Revenue-officer shall be compelled to say whence he got any  
information as to the commission of any offence against the public revenue. 
Explanation.–  In this Article, “Revenue -officer” means any officer employed in or  
about the business of any branch of the public revenue. 
9.  Professional communications.– No advocate shall at any time be permitted, 
unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him 
in the course and for the purpose of his employment as such advocate, by or on 
behalf of his  client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which 
he has  become acquainted in  the course and for the purpose of his professional 
employment, or to disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for 
the purpose of such employment: 
Provided that nothing in this Article shall protect from disclosure– 
(1)  any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal purpose; or 
(2)  any fact observed by any advocate, in the course of his employment as 
such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the 
commencement of his  employment, whether the attention o f such 
advocate was or was not directed to such  fact by or on behalf of his 
client. 
Explanation.– The obligation stated in this Article continues after the employment 
has ceased. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A, a client, says to B , an advocate “I wish to obtain poss ession of 
property by the use of a forged deed on which I request you to sue.” 
The communication, being made in furtherance of a criminal purpose , is not 
protected from disclosure. 
(b)  A, being charged with embezzlement, retains B, an advocate, to 
defend him. In the  course of the proceedings, B observes that an entry has been 
made in A’s account  book charging A with the sum said to have been embezzled, 
which entry was not in the book at the commencement of his employment. 
This being a fact observed by B in  the course of his employment, showing that 
a fraud has been committed since the commencement of the proceedings, it is not 
protected from disclosure. 
10.  Article 9 to apply to interpreters, etc. – The provisions of Article 9 shall 
apply to interpreters, and the clerks or servants of advocates. 
11.  Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence .– If any party to a suit gives 
evidence therein at his own instance or otherwise, he shall not be deemed to have  
consented thereby to such disclosure as is mentioned  in Article 9, and, if any party to 
a suit or proceeding calls any such advocate as a witness, he shall be deemed to 
have consented to such disclosure only if  he questions such advocate on matters 
which, but for such question, he would not be at liberty to disclose. 
12.  Confidential communications with legal advisers .– No one shall be 
compelled to  disclose to the Court, tribunal or other authority exercising judicial or 
quasi-judicial powers or jurisdiction any confidential communication which has taken 
place between him and his legal professional adviser, unless he offers himself as a 
witness, in which case he may be compelled to disclose any such communications 
as may appear to the Court necessary to be known in order to explain any evidence 
which he has given, but no others. 
13.  Production of title deed of witness, not a party .– No witness who is not a 
party to a suit shall be compelled to produce his title deeds to any property or any 
document in virtue of which he holds any property as pledgee or mortg agee or any 
document the production of which might tend to criminate him unless he has agreed 
in writing to  produce them with the person seeking the production of such deeds or 
some person through whom he claims. 
14.  Production of documents, which another  person, having possession, 
could refuse to produce .– No one shall be compelled to produce documents in his  
possession, which any other person would be entitled to refuse to produce if they 
were in his possession, unless such last -mentioned person consents  to their 
production. 
15.  Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will 
criminate.– A witness shall not be excused from answering any question as to any 
matter relevant to  the matter in issue in any suit or in any civil or criminal 
proceedings, upon the ground that the answer to such question will criminate, or may 
tend directly or indirectly to  criminate, such witness, or that it will expose, or tend 
directly or indirectly to expose, such witness to a penalty or forfeiture of any kind: 
Provided that no such answer, which a witness shall be compelled to give , 
shall subject him to any arrest or prosecution, or be proved against him in any 
criminal proceeding, except a prosecution for giving false evidence by such answer. 
16.  Accomplice.– An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an 
accused person, except in the case of an offence punishable with had; and a 
conviction is not  illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated 
testimony of an accomplice. 
17.  Competence and numb er of witnesses .– (1) The competence of a person 
to testify, and the number of witnesses required in any case shall be determined in  
accordance with the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah. 
(2)  Unless otherwise provided in any l aw relating to the enforcement of 
Hudood or any other special law,– 
(a)  in matters pertaining to financial or future obligations, if reduced to 
writing, the instrument shall be attested by two men , or one man and 
two women, so that one may  remind the othe r, if necessary, and 
evidence shall be led accordingly; and 
(b)  in all other matters, the Court may accept, or act on , the testimony of 
one man or  one woman or such other evidence as the circumstances 
of the case may warrant. 
CHAPTER III 
OF THE RELEVANCY OF FACTS 
18.  Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts .– Evidence 
may be  given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non -existence of every 
fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of 
no others. 
Explanation.– This Article shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact, 
which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force  
relating to Civil Procedure. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A is  tried for the murder of B by be ating him with a club with the 
intention of causing his death. 
At A’s trial the following facts are in issue– 
A’s beating B with the club; 
A’s causing B’s death by such beating; 
A’s intention to cause B’s death. 
(b)  A suitor does not bring with him and have in readiness for production at 
the first hearing of the case, a bond on which he relies. This Article does not enable 
him to  produce the bond or prove its contents at a subsequent stage of the 
proceedings, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the law 
for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure. 
19.  Relevancy of facts forming part of some transaction .– Facts, which 
though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same 
transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at 
different times and places. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or 
done by A or B or the by -standers at the beating, or, so shortly before or after it as to 
form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact. 
(b)  A is accused of waging war against Pakistan by taking part in an armed 
insurrection in which property is destroyed , troops are attacked, and goals are 
broken open. The occurre nce of these facts is relevant, as forming part of the 
general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of them. 
(c)  A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a 
correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the sub ject out of which the 
libel arose, and forming  part of the correspondence in which it is contained, are 
relevant facts, though they do not contain the libel itself. 
(d)  The question is, whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered 
to A. The  goods w ere delivered to several Intermediate persons successively. Each 
delivery is a relevant fact. 
20.  Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue .– Facts 
which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, o r 
facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or 
which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether A robbed B. 
The facts that, shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his  
possession, and that he showed it or mentioned the fact that he had it, to third 
person, are relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether A murdered B. 
Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the pl ace where the 
murder was committed, are relevant facts. 
(c)  The question is, whether A poisoned B. 
The state of B’s health before the symptoms ascribed to poison, and habits of 
B, known to A, which afforded an opportunity for the administration of poison,  are 
relevant facts. 
21.  Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct .– (1) Any fact is 
relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or  
relevant fact. 
(2)  The conduct of any party, or of any agent to any par ty, to any suit or 
proceeding, in reference to such suit or proceeding, or in reference to any fact in 
issue therein or  relevant thereto, and the conduct of any person an offence against 
whom is the subject  of any proceeding, is relevant, if such conduct i nfluences or is 
influenced by any fact  in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or 
subsequent thereto. 
Explanation 1.– The word “conduct” in this clause does not include statements, 
unless those statements accompany and explain acts other tha n statements but this 
explanation is not to affect the relevancy of statements under any other Article of this  
Order. 
Explanation 2.– When the conduct of any person is relevant, any statement made to 
him or in his presence and hearing, which affects such conduct, is relevant.  
Illustrations 
(a)  A is tried for the murder of B. 
The facts that A murdered C, that B knew that A had murdered C , and that B 
had tried to extort money from A by threatening to make his knowledge public, are 
relevant. 
(b)  A sues B up on a bond for the payment of money , B denies the making 
of the bond. 
The fact that, at the time when the bond was alleged to be made, B required 
money for a particular purpose, is relevant. 
(c)  A is tried for the murder of B by poison the fact that, befor e the death of 
B, A procured poison similar to that, which was administered to B, is relevant. 
(d)  The question is whether a certain document is the will of A. 
The facts that, not long before the date of the alleged will A made inquiry into 
matters to which the provisions of the alleged will relate, that he consulted advocates 
in reference to making the will, and that he caused drafts of other wills to be 
prepared of which he did not approve, are relevant. 
(e)  A is accused of a crime. 
The facts that eithe r before or at the time of, or after the alleged crime, A 
provided evidence which would tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance 
favourable to himself, or that he destroyed or concealed evidence or prevented the 
presence or  procured the absence of persons who might have been witnesses, or 
suborned persons to give false evidence respecting it, are relevant. 
(f)  The question is whether A robbed B. 
The facts that, after B was robbed, C said in A’s presence: 
“the Police are coming to look for the ma n who robbed B”, and that 
immediately afterwards A ran away, are relevant. 
(g)  The question is whether A owes B rupees 10,000. 
The facts that A asked C to l end him money, and that D said to C in A’s 
presence and hearing: “I advise you not to trust A, for he owes B 10,000 rupees”, 
and that A went away without making any answer are relevant facts. 
(h)  The question is, whether A committed a crime. 
The fact that A absconded after receiving a letter warning him that inquiry was 
being made for the criminal, and the contents of the letter, are relevant. 
(i)  A is accused of a crime. 
The facts that, after the commission of the alleged crime , he absconded, or 
was in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or 
attempted to conceal th ings which were or might have been used in committing it, 
are relevant. 
(j)  The question is whether A was ravished. 
The facts that, shortly after the alleged rape, she made a complaint relating to 
the crime, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was 
made are relevant. 
The fact that, without making a complaint, she said, that she had been 
ravished is not  relevant as conduct under this Article though it may be relevant as a 
dying declaration under Article 46, paragraph (1), or as corroborative evidence under 
Article 153. 
(k)  The question is, whether A was robbed. 
The fact that, soon after the alleged robbery, he made a complaint relating to 
the offence, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint 
was made, are relevant. 
The fact that he said he had been robbed without making any complaint, is 
not relevant, as conduct under this Article, though it may be relevant, as a dying  
declaration under Article 46, paragraph (1) , or as corroborative evidence under 
Article 153. 
22.  Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts .– Facts necessary 
to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an  
inference suggested by a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which establish the  identity 
of anything or person whose identity is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any  
fact in issue, or relevant fact happened, or Which show the relation of parties by  
whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they are neces sary for 
that purpose. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether a given document is the will of A. 
The state of A’s property and of his family at the date of the alleged wi ll may 
be relevant facts. 
(b)  A sues B for a libel imputing disgraceful conduct to A; B affirms that the 
matter alleged to be libellous is true. 
The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was 
published may be relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue. 
The particulars of a dispute between A and B ab out a matter unconnected 
with the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be 
relevant if it affected the relations between A and B. 
(c)  A is accused of a crime. 
The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime,  A absconded from his 
house, is relevant under Article 21, as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts 
in issue. 
The fact that at the time when he left home he had sudden and urgent 
business at the place to which he went is relevant, as tending to explain th e fact that 
he left home suddenly. 
The details of the business on which he left are not relevant, except in so far 
as they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent. 
(d)  A sues B for inducing C to break a contract of service made by hi m 
with A. C, on  leaving A’s service, says to A “I am leaving you because B has made 
me a better offer. 
This statement is a relevant fact as explanatory of C’s conduct, which is 
relevant as a fact in issue. 
(e)  A, accused of theft, is seen to give the stol en property to B, who is 
seen to give it  to A’s wife. B , says as he delivers: “A says you are to hide this.” B’s 
statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact which is part of the transaction. 
(f)  A is tried for a riot and is proved to have marched at the head of a mob. 
The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction. 
23.  Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design .– 
Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have 
conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong anything said, done 
or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after 
the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant 
fact as  against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring, as well for the 
purpose of  proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing 
that any such person was a party to it. 
Illustrations 
Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joi ned in a conspiracy to 
wage war against Pakistan. 
The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C 
collected money in Peshawar for a like object , D persuaded persons to join the  
conspiracy in Karachi. E published writings advoc ating the object in view at Multan , 
and F transmitted from Lahore to G at Kabul the money which C had collected at  
Peshawar and contents of a letter written by H giving an account of the conspiracy 
are each relevant, both to prove the existence of the cons piracy, and to prove A’s  
complicity in it, although he may have been ignorant of all of them, and although the  
persons by whom they were done were strangers to him and although they may 
have been taken place before he Joined the conspiracy or after he left it. 
24.  When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant .– Facts not otherwise 
relevant are relevant– 
(1)  if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact; 
(2)  if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the 
existence or non-existence of any f act in  issue or relevant fact highly probable or 
improbable. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question i s, whether A committed a crime at Peshawar on a 
certain day. 
The fact that, on that day, A was at Lahore is relevant. 
The fact that, near  the time when the crime was committed. A was at a 
distance from  the place where it was committed, which would render it highly 
improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether A committed a crime. 
The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either 
by A, B , C or D. Every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed 
by no one else and that it was not committed by either B, C or D, is relevant. 
25.  In suits for damages fac ts tending to enable Court to determine amount 
are relevant.– In suits in which damages are claimed, any fact which will enable the 
Court to determine the amount of damages which ought to be awarded, is relevant. 
26.  Facts relevant when right or custom is  in question.– Where the question 
is as to the existence of any right or custom, the following facts are relevant:– 
(a)  any transaction by which the right or custom in question was created, 
claimed, modified, recognized, asserted or denied, or which was 
inconsistent with its existence; 
(b)  particular instances in which the right or custom was claimed, 
recognized or  exercised, or in which its exercise was disputed, 
asserted or departed from. 
Illustrations 
The question is whether A has a right to a fishery.  A deed conferring the 
fishery on A’s ancestors, a mortgage of the fishery by A’s father, a subsequent grant 
of the  fishery by A’s father, irreconcilable with mortgage, particular instances in 
which A’s father exercised the right, or in which the exercise of the right was stopped 
by A’s neighbours are relevant facts. 
27.  Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body, or bodily feeling .– 
Facts showing the existence of any state of mind, such as intention, knowledge, 
good faith, negligence, rashness, ill-will or good-will towards any particular person, or 
showing the existence of any state of body or bodily feeling, are relevant, when the 
existence of any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling is in issue or relevant. 
Explanation 1.– A fact relevant as showing the existence of a relevant state of mind  
must show that the state of mind exists, not generally, but in reference to the 
particular matter in question. 
Explanation 2 .– But where, upon the trial of a person accused of an offence, the 
previous commission by the accused of an offence is relevant within the meaning of  
this Article, the previous conviction of such person shall also be a relevant fact. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. It is 
proved that he was in possession of a particular stolen article. 
The fact that, at the same time, he was in possession of many other stolen 
articles Is relevant, as tending to show that he know each and all of the articles of 
which he was in possession to be stolen. 
(b)  A is accused of fraudulently delivering to another person a counterfeit 
coin which, at the time when he delivered it, he knew to be counterfeit. 
The fact that, at the time of its delivery, A was possessed of a number of other 
pieces of counterfeit coin is relevant. 
The fact that A had been previously convicted of delivering to another person 
as genuine a counterfeit coin knowing it to be counterfeit is relevant. 
(c)  A sues B for damage done by a dog of B’s which B knew to be 
ferocious. 
The facts  that the dog had previously bitten X, Y and Z, and that they had 
made complaints to B, are relevant. 
(d)  The question is whether A, the acceptor of a bill of exchange, knew 
that the name of the payee was fictitious. 
The fact that A had accepted other bil ls drawn in the same manner before 
they could have been transmitted to him by the payee if the payee had been a real 
person, is relevant as showing that A knew that the payee was a fictitious person. 
(e)  A is accused of defaming B by publishing an imputat ion intend to harm 
the reputation of B. 
The fact of previous publications by A respecting B, showing ill -will on the part 
of A  towards B is relevant, as proving A’s intention to harm B’s reputation by the  
particular publication in question. 
The facts that there was no previous quarrel between A and B, and that A 
repeated the matter complained of as he heard it, are relevant, as showing that A did 
not intend to harm the reputation of B. 
(f)  A is sued by B for fraudulently representing to B that C, was solve nt 
whereby B, being induced to trust C, who was insolvent, suffered loss. 
The fact that at the time when A represented C to be solvent, C was 
supposed to be  solvent by his neighbours and by person s dealing with him, is 
relevant, as showing that A made the representation in good faith. 
(g)  A is sued by B for the price of work done by B, upon a house of which 
A is owner, by the order of C, a contractor. 
A’s defence is that B’s contract was with C. 
The fact that A paid C for the work in question is relevant, as proving that A 
did, in good faith, make over to C the management of the work in question, so that C 
was in a position to contract with B on C’s own account, and not as agent for A. 
(h)  A is accused of the dishonest misappropriation of properly which he  
had found, and the question is whether, when he appropriated it, he be lieved in good 
faith that the real owner could not be found. 
The fact that public notice of the loss of the property had been given in the 
place where A was, is relevant, as showing tha t A did not in good faith believe that 
the real owner of the property could not be found. 
The fact that A knew, or had reason to believe, that the notice was given 
fraudulently by C, who had heard of the loss of the property and wished to set up a 
false claim to it, is relevant, as showing that the fact that A knew of the notice did not 
disprove A’s good faith. 
(i)  A is charged with shooting at B with intent to kill him. In order to show 
A’s intent the fact of A’s having previously shot at B may be proved. 
(j)  A is charged with sending threatening letters to B. Threatening letters 
previously sent by A to B may be proved, as showing the intention of the letters. 
(k)  The question is, whether A has been guilty of cruelty towards B, his 
wife. Expressions of t heir feeling towards each other shortly before or after the 
alleged cruelty are relevant facts. 
(l)  The question is whether A’s death was caused by poison. Statements 
made by A during his illness as to his symptoms are relevant facts. 
(m)  The question is , what was the state of A’s health at the time an 
assurance on his life was affected. 
Statements made by A as to the state of his health at or near the time in 
question are relevant facts. 
(n)  A sues B for negligence in providing him with a carriage for h ire not 
reasonably fit for use, where by A was injured. 
The fact that B’s attention was drawn on other occasions to the defect of that  
particular carriage is relevant. 
The fact that B was habitually negligent about the carriages, which he let to 
hire, is irrelevant. 
(o)  A is tried for the murder of B by intentionally shooting him dead 
The fact that A on other occasions shot at B is relevant as showing his 
intention to shoot B. 
The fact that A was in the habit of shooting at people with Intent to murder 
them is irrelevant. 
(p)  A is tried for a crime. 
The fact that he said something indicating an intention to commit that 
particular crime is relevant. 
The fact that he said something indicating a general disposition to commit 
crimes of that class is irrelevant. 
28.  Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional .– 
When there is a question whether 
2
an act was accidental or intentional, or done with 
a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that suc h act formed part of a series of  
similar occurrence, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is  
relevant. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for 
which it is insured. 
The facts that A lived in several houses successively each of whi ch he 
insured, in each  of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received 
payment from different insurance officers, are relevant, as tending to show that the 
fires were not accidental. 
(b)  A is employed to receive money from the debtors o f B. It is A’s duty to 
make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him. He makes an entry 
showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. 
The question is whether this false entry was accidental or intentional. 
The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that 
the false entry is in each case in favour of A, are relevant. 
(c)  A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit rupee. The 
question is, whether the delivery of the rupee was accidental. 
The facts that , soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered 
counterfeit rupees to C, D  and E are relevant as showing that the delivery to B was 
not accidental. 
29.  Existence of course of business when relevant .– When there is a question 
whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, 
according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether a particular letter was despatched.  
The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a 
certain place to be carried to the post, and that particular letter was put in that place 
are relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether a particular letter reach A. 
The facts that it was po sted in due course, and was not returned through the 
Dead Letter Office, are relevant. 
ADMISSIONS 
                                                 
2The w ord “an” is misprinted as “on”,  in the original Gazette.  
30.  Admission defined .– An admission is a statement, oral or documentary , 
which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is  
made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned 
3
[:] 
4
[Explanation.– Statements generated by automated information systems may be 
attributed to the person exercising power or control over the said information system] 
31.  Admission by party to proceeding or his agent, etc .– Statements made by 
a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, 
under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorized by him to  
make them, are admissions. 
(2)  Statements made by parties to suits suing or sued in a representative 
character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them 
held that character. 
(3)  Statements made by– 
(a)  persons who have any proprietary or pec uniary interest in the subject 
matter of the  proceeding, and who make the statement in their 
character of persons so interested or 
(b)  persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in 
the subject– matter of the suit,  
are admission s if they are made during the continuance of  the interest 
of the persons making the statements. 
32.  Admission by persons whose position must be proved as against party 
to suit.– Statements made by persons , whose position or liability it is necessary to 
prove as against any party to the suit, are admissions, if such statements would be 
relevant as against such persons in relation to such position or liability in a suit 
brought by or against them, and if they are made whilst the person making them 
occupies such position or is subject to such liability. 
Illustrations 
A undertakes to collect rents for B. 
B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B. 
A denies that rent was due from C to B. 
A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission, and is relevant  fact as 
against A, if 
A denies that C did owe rent to B. 
33.  Admission by persons expressly referred to by party to suit .– Statements 
made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in 
reference to matter in dispute are admissions. 
Illustrations 
                                                 
3The full stop at the end is substituted w ith colcon, by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, 
s.29 and Schedule, Item 2; published in the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
4Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 2; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound. 
A says to B: “Go and ask C 
C knows all about it.” C’s statement is an admission. 
34.  Proof of admissions against persons making th em, and by or on their  
behalf.– Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who 
makes them, or his representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or o n 
behalf of the person  who makes them or by his representative in  interest, except in 
the following cases:– 
(1)  An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, 
when it is of  such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it 
would be relevant as between third persons under Article 46. 
(2)  An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the per son making it, 
when it consist of a statement of the existence of any state of mind or 
body, relevant or in  issue, made at or about the time when such state 
of mind or body existed, and is  accompanied by conduct rendering its 
falsehood improbable. 
(3)  An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, if 
it is relevant otherwise than as an admission. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed  is or is not 
forged. A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged. 
A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a 
statement by A that the deed is forged ; but A cannot prove a statement by himself 
that the deed  is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is 
forged. 
(b)  A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. 
Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course. 
A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business showing  
observations alleged to have been taken by hi m from day to day , and indicating that 
the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these  statements, 
because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead , under 
Article 46 paragraph (2). 
(c)  A is accused of a crime committed by him at Peshawar. 
He produces a letter written by him self and dated at Lahore on that day, and 
bearing the Lahore post-marks of that day. 
The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because , if a were dead, 
it would be admissible under Article 46 paragraph (2). 
(d)  A is accused of receiving stolen goods know ing them to be stolen. He 
offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value. 
A may prove these statements, though they are admissions, because they are 
explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue. 
(e)  A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit coin 
which he knows to be counterfeit. 
He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the coin as he 
doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that that person did examine it and 
told him it was genuine. 
A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last preceding 
Illustration. 
35.  When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant .– Oral 
admissions as to the conte nts of a document are not relevant , unless and until the 
party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence 
of the  contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless 
the genuineness of a document produced is in question. 
36.  Admissions in civil cases when relevant .– In civil cases no admission is 
relevant, if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be 
given, or under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed 
together that evidence of it should not be given. 
Explanation.– Nothing in this Article shall be taken to exempt any advocate from  
giving evidence of any matter which he may be compelled to give evidence under  
Article 9. 
37.  Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise, when irrelevant in  
criminal proceeding.– A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a  
criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have 
been caused by any inducement, thre at or promise having reference to the charge 
against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in 
the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to 
him reasonable for supposing that by making  it he would gain any advantage or 
avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.  
38.  Confession to police officer not to be proved .– No confession made to a 
police-officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. 
39.  Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved 
against him.– Subject to Article 4 0, no confession made by any person whilst he is 
in the custody of a police - officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a  
Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person. 
Explanation.– In this Article, “Magistrate” does not include the head of a village  
discharging magisterial function unless such headman is a Magistrate exercising the  
powers of a Magistrate under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898). 
40.  How much of information received from accused may be proved .– When 
any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a 
person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police -officer, so much of such  
information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact  
thereby discovered, may be proved. 
41.  Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, 
threat or promise, relevant .– If such a confession as is referred to in Article 37 is 
made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in 
the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant. 
42.  Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of 
promise of  secrecy, etc  .– If such confession is otherwise relevant, it does not 
become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in 
consequence of a  deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of 
obtaining it, or when he  was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions 
when he need not have  answered, whatever may have been the form of those 
questions, or because he was not  warned that he was not bound to make such 
confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him:  
Provided that the provisions of this Article shall not apply to the trial of cases 
under the laws relating to the enforcement of Hudood. 
43.  Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and 
others jointly under trial for same offence  .– When more persons than one are 
being tried  jointly for the same offence , and a confession made by one of such 
persons is proved,– 
(a)  such confession shall be proof against the person; making it; and 
(b)  the Court may take into consideration such confession as 
circumstantial evidence against such other person. 
Explanation.– “Offence’”, as used in this Article, includes the abetment of , or 
attempt to commit, the offence. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A and B are jointly tried for the mu rder of C. It is proved that A said: “B 
and I murdered C”. The Court may consider the effect of this confession against B. 
(b)  A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C 
was murdered by A and B , and that B said: “A and I murde red C”. This statement 
may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not  being jointly 
tried. 
44.  Accused persons to be liable to cross  examination.– All accused persons, 
including an accomplice, shall be liable to cross-examination. 
45.  Admission not conclusive proof but may estop .– Admissions are not 
conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under 
the provisions hereinafter contained. 
STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO  CANNOT BE CALLED AS 
WITNESSES 
46.  Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or 
cannot be  found, etc., is relevant .– Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts 
made by a  person who is dead, or who cannot, be found, or who has become 
incapable of giving  evidence, or w hose attendance can not be procured without an 
amount of delay or  expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to 
the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases:– 
(1)  When it relates to cause of death .– When the statement is made by 
a person as to  the cause of his death, or as to any of the 
circumstances of the transaction which  resulted in his death, in cases 
in which the cause of that person’s death comes into  question. Such 
statements are relevant whether the p erson who made them was or 
was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, 
and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which  the cause 
of his death comes into question. 
(2)  Or is made in course of business  .– When the statement was made 
by such person in  the ordinary course of business, and in particular 
when it consists of any entry or  memorandum made by him in books 
kept in the ordinary course of business,  or in the  discharge of 
professional duty; or of an acknowledgment written or signed by him of  
the receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any kind; or of a 
document used in commerce written or signed by him; or of the date of 
a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him. 
(3)  Or against inte rest of maker .– When the statement is against the 
pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or when , if 
true, it would expose or would  have exposed him to a criminal 
prosecution or to a suit for damages. 
(4)  Or gives opinion as to public right or customs , or matters of 
general interest .– When the statement gives the opinion of any such 
person, as to the existence of any  public right or custom or matter of 
public or general interest, of the existence, of  which it existed, he would 
have been  likely to be aware, and when such statement was  made 
before any controversy as to such right, custom or matter has arisen. 
(5)  Or relates to existence of relationship .– When the statement relates 
to the  existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or  adoption 
between persons as to  whose relationship by blood ,  marriage or 
adoption the person making the statement  had special means of 
knowledge, and when the statement was made before question in  
dispute was raised. 
(6)  Or is made in will or deed relati ng to family affairs  .– When the 
statement relates  to the existence of any relationship by blood, 
marriage or adoption between persons  deceased, and is made in any 
will or deed relating to the affairs of the family to which  any such 
deceased person belonge d, o r in any family pedigree, or upon any  
tombstone, family portrait or other things on which such statements are 
usually made and when such statement was made before the question 
in dispute was raised. 
(7)  Or in document relating to transaction mentioned  in Article 26, 
paragraph (a).– When the statement is contained in any deed, will or 
other document which relates to any such transaction as is mentioned 
in Article 26, paragraph (a). 
(8)  Or is made by several persons and expresses feelings relevant to 
matter in question .– When the statement was made by a number of 
persons, and expressed  feelings or impressions on their part relevant 
to the matter in question. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether A was murdered by B ; or A dies of Injuries 
received in a  transaction in the course of which she was ravished. The question is, 
whether she was ravished by B; or 
The question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a 
suit would lie against B by A’s widow. 
Statements made by A as to the ca use of his or her death, referring 
respectively to the  murder, the rape and the actionable wrong under consideration 
are relevant facts. 
(b)  The question is as to the date of A’s birth. 
An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept in the cou rse of 
business, stating that, on a given day, he attended A’s mother and delivered her of a 
son, is a relevant fact. 
(c)  The question is, whether A was in Peshawar on a given day. 
A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor, regularly kept in the co urse of 
business, that on a given day the solicitor attended A at a place mentioned, in  
Peshawar, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business, is a  
relevant fact. 
(d)  The question is, whether a ship sailed from Karachi harbour on a give n 
day. A letter written by a deceased member of a merchant’s firm by which she was  
chartered to their correspondents in London, to whom the cargo was consigned,  
stating that the ship sailed on a given day from Karachi harbour is a relevant fact. 
(e)  The question is, whether rent was paid to A for certain land. 
A letter from A’s deceased agent to A saying that he had received the rent on 
A’s account and held it at A’s order, is a relevant fact. 
(f)  The question is, whether A end B were legally married . The statement 
of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such  circumstances, that the 
celebration would be a crime is relevant. 
(g)  The question is , whether A, a person who cannot be found, wrote a 
letter on a  certain day. The fact that a letter writ ten by him is dated on that day is 
relevant. 
(h)  The question is, what was the cause of the wreck of a ship.  A protest 
made by the Captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a relevant fact. 
(i)  The question is, whether a given road is a public way. 
A statement by A, a deceased headman of the village, that the road was 
public, is a relevant fact. 
(j)  The question is, what was the price of grain on a certain day in a 
particular market.  A statement of the price, made by a deceased banya in the 
ordinary course of his business, is a relevant fact. 
(k)  The question is, whether A, who is dead, was the father of B. 
A statement by A that B was his son is a relevant fact. 
(l)  The question is, what was the date of the birth of A. 
A letter from A’s deceased father to a friend, announcing the birth of A on a 
given day, is a relevant fact. 
(m)  The question is, whether and when, A and B were married. 
An entry in a memorandum -book by C, the deceased father of B, of his 
daughter’s marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant fact. 
(n)  A sues B for a libel expressed in a painted caricature expose d in a 
shop window. 
The question is as to the similarity of the caricature and its libellous character. 
The remarks on a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved. 
5
[46-A Relevance of information generated, received or recorded by automated 
information system. – Statements in the form of electronic documents generated, 
received or recorded by an automated information system while it is in working order, 
are relevant facts.] 
47.  Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, 
the truth of facts therein stated  .– Evidence given by a witness in a judicial 
proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the 
purpose of  proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding , or in a later stage of the 
same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is 
dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way 
by the ad verse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of 
delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers 
unreasonable: 
Provided that– 
the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives -in-
Interest; 
the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to 
cross-examine; 
the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second 
proceeding. 
Explanation.– A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a  proceeding 
between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this Article. 
STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES  
                                                 
5Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance , 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 3; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
48.  Entries in books of account when relevant .– Entries in books of account , 
regularly kept in the course of business , are relevant whenever they refer to a matter 
into which the Court has to enquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient 
evidence to charge any person with liability. 
Illustrations 
A sues B for Rs. 1,000, and shows entries in his account books showin g B to be 
indebted to him to this amount . The entries are relevant, but are not sufficient , 
without other evidence, to prove the debt. 
49.  Relevancy of entry in public record made in performance of duty .– An 
entry in any public or other official book, reg ister or record, stating a fact in issue or 
relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty, or by 
any other person in performance of a duty specialty enjoined by the law of the 
country in which such book, register or record is kept, is itself a relevant fact. 
50.  Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans .– Statements of facts 
in issue or relevant facts made in published maps or charts generally offered for 
public sale, or in maps or plans made under the authority of the Federal Government 
or any Provincial Government, as to matters usually represented or stated in such 
maps, charts or plans, are themselves relevant facts. 
51.  Relevancy of statements as to fact of public nature, contained in certain 
Acts or notific ations.– When the Court has to form an opinion as to  the existence 
of any fact of a  public nature, any statement of it, made in a recital contained in any 
Act of the Central Legislature or of any other legislative authority in Pakistan or in a 
Government notification appearing in the official Gazette is a relevant fact. 
52.  Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law -books.– When 
the Court has to form an opinion as to a law of any country , any statement of such 
law contained in a book purporting  to be printed or published under the authority, of 
the Government of such country and to contain any such law, and any report of a 
ruling of the Courts  of such country contained in a book purporting to be a report of 
such rulings, is relevant. 
HOW MUCH OF A STATEMENT IS TO BE PROVED  
53.  What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation, 
document, book or series of letters or papers .– When any statement of which 
evidence is given forms part of a longer statement, or of a conversation or  part of an 
isolated document, or is contained in a document which forms part of a book or of a  
connected series of letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so much and no 
more of the statement, conversation, document, book or series of letters or pap ers 
as the Court considers necessary in that particular case to the full understanding of 
the nature and effect of the statement, and of the circumstances under which it was 
made. 
JUDGMENTS OF COURTS OF JUSTICE WHEN RELEVANT  
54.  Previous Judgments relevan t to bar a second suit or trial .– The existence 
of any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any Court from taking 
cognizance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question is whether 
such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold such trial. 
55.  Relevancy of certain judgments in probate etc., jurisdiction .– A final 
judgment, order o n decree of a competent Court in the exercise of probate 
matrimonial admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or take s away 
from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to 
any such character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any 
specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any such legal 
character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is relevant. 
Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof–  
that any legal character which it confers accused, at the time when such 
judgment, order or decree came into operation;  
that any l egal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, 
accrued to that parson at the time when such Judgment, order or decree declares it 
to have accrued to that person;  
that any legal character which it takes away from any such person cease d at 
the time from which such judgment, order or decree declared that it had ceased or 
should cease; and 
that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the 
property of that person at the t ime from which such judgment, order or decree 
declares that it had been or should be his property. 
56.  Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those 
mentioned in Article 55 .– Judgments, orders or decrees other than those 
mentioned in Article 55 are relevant if they relate to m atters of a public nature 
relevant to the enquiry; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive 
proof of that which they state. 
Illustrations 
A sues B for tr espass or his land, B alleges th e existence of a public right of 
way over the land, which A denies. 
The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C 
for a trespass on the same land , in which C alleged the existence of the same right 
of way, is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists. 
57.  Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in Articles 54 to 56, when 
relevant .– Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in Articles 54, 
55 and 56 are irrelevant, unless the existence of such judgment , order or decree is a 
fact in issue, or is relevant under some other provision of this Order. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them, 
C in each case says that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the 
circumstances are such t hat it is probably true in each case, or in neither. A obtains 
a decree against C for damages o n the ground that C failed to make out his 
justification. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C. 
(b)  A prosecutes B for adultery with C, A’s wife. B denies that C is A’s wife 
but the Court convict B of adultery. 
Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A’s lifetime. C 
says that she never was A’s wife. The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C. 
(c)  A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him, B is convicted . A 
afterwards sues C for the cow , which B had sold to him before his conviction. As 
between A and C, the judgment against B is irrelevant. 
(d)  A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B. C, B’s 
son, murders A in consequence. The existence of the judgment is relevant, as 
showing motive for a crime. 
(e)  A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of 
theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue. 
(f)  A is tried for the murder o f B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and 
that A was convicted and sentenced is relevant and under Article 21 as showing the 
motive for the fact in issue. 
58.  Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or Incompetency of C ourt, 
may be proved .– Any pa rty to a suit or other proceeding may show that any 
judgment, order or decree which is relevant under Articles 54, 55 or 56, and which 
has bean proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to 
deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion. 
OPINION OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT  
59.  Opinions of experts  .– When the Court has to form an opinion upon a poin t 
of foreign law, or of science, or art, or as to identity of hand -writing or finger 
impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign 
law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of hand -writing or finger impressions 
6
[, or as to authenticity and integrity of electronic documents by or through an 
information system] 
7
[or as to the function ing, specifications, programming and 
operations of information systems, are relevant facts.] 
Such persons are called experts. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison . The 
opinion of experts as to the symptoms produce d by the poisoned by which A is 
supposed to have died, are relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain act, was by 
reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the a ct, or that 
he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. 
The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by 
A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind 
usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, 
or of knowing that what they do either wrong or contrary to law are relevant. 
                                                 
6Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 4; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
7Substituted ibid, for the w ords “are relevant facts” 
(c)  The question is , whether a certain document was written by A. Another 
document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. 
The opinions of experts  on the question whether the two documents were 
written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant. 
60.  Facts bearing upon opinions of experts .– Facts, not otherwise relevant, 
are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinion s of experts, when 
such opinion are relevant. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison . The fact 
that other persons, who were poisoned by that poison, exhibited certain symptoms 
which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms that poison, is relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether an obstruction to a harbour is caused by a 
certain sea-wall. The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects, but 
where there were no such sea-walls, began to be obstructed a t about the same time, 
is relevant. 
61.  Opinion as to hand -writing when relevant .– When the Court has to form an 
opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion 
of any parson acquainted with the hand-writing of the person by whom it is supposed 
to be written or signed that it was or it was not written or signed by that person, is 
relevant fact. 
Explanation.– A person is said to be acquainted with the hand -writing of another 
person when he has seen that person write, or when  he has received documents 
purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or 
under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of 
business, documents purporting to be written by that person  have been habitually 
submitted to him.  
Illustrations 
The question is , whether a given letter is in the hand -writing of A, a merchant 
in London. B is a merchant in Peshawar, who has written letters addressed to A and 
received letters purporting to be writ ten by him, C is B’s clerk, whose duty it was to 
examine and file B’s correspondence. D is B’s broker, to whom B habitually 
submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising him 
thereon. The opinion of B, C and D on the questi on whether the letter is in the hand-
writing of A are relevant, though neither B, C or D ever saw A write. 
62.  Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant  .– When the 
Court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any general custom or right, the 
opinion, as to the existence of such custom or right, of persons who would be likely 
to know of its existence if it existed, are relevant. 
Explanation.– the expression “general custom or right” includes customs or rights 
common to any considerable class of persons. 
Illustration 
The right of the villagers of a particular village to use the water of a particular 
well is a general right within the meaning of this Article. 
63.  Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant  .– When the Court has to 
form an opinion as to –the usages and tenets of any body of men or family, the 
constitution and government of any religious or charitable foundation, or the meaning 
of words or terms used in particular districts or by particular classes of people,  the 
opinions of persons having special means of knowledge thereon, are relevant facts. 
64.  Opinion on relationship when relevant  .– When the Court has to form an 
opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed by 
conduct, as to th e existence .of such relationship, of any person who, as a member 
of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a 
relevant fact:  
Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in 
proceedings under th e Divorce Act 1869 (IV of 1869), or in prosecutions under 
Section 494 or 495 of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860). 
Illustrations 
(a)  The question is whether A and B were married. The fact they were 
usually received and treated by their friends as husband and wife, it relevant. 
(b)  The question is, whether A was the legitimate son of B. The fact that A 
was always treated as such by members of the family, is relevant. 
65.  Grounds of opinion when relevant  .– Whenever the opinion of any living 
person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is based are also relevant. 
Illustration 
An expert may give an account of experiments performed by him for the 
purpose of forming his opinion. 
CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT 
66.  In civil cases character to prove co nduct imputed irrelevant .– In civil 
cases the  fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render 
probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him is irrelevant, except in so far as 
such character appears from facts otherwise relevant. 
67.  In criminal cases previous good character relevant .– In criminal 
proceedings the fact that the person accused is of a good character is relevant. 
68.  Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply .– In criminal 
proceedings the fact that the accus ed person has a bad character is irrelevant, 
unless evidence has  been given that he has a good character, in which case it 
become relevant. 
Explanation 1.– This Article does not apply to cases in which the bad character of 
any person is itself a fact in issue. 
Explanation 2.– A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character. 
69.  Character as affecting damages .– In civil cases the fact that the character 
of any person is such as to affect the amount of damages, which he ought to receive, 
is relevant. 
Explanation.– In Articles 66, 67, 68 and 69, the word “character” includes both  
reputation and disposition; but , except as provided in Article 68, evidence may be  
given only of general reputation and general disposition, and not of particular acts by 
which reputation or disposition were shown. 
CHAPTER IV 
OF ORAL EVIDENCE 
70.  Proof of facts by oral evidence .– All facts, except the contents of 
documents, may be proved by oral evidence. 
71.  Oral evidence must be direct .– Oral evidence must, in all ca ses whatever 
be direct, that is to say–  
If it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be the evidence of a witness 
who says he saw it;  
If it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness 
who says he heard it; 
 If it re fers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any 
other manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he perceived it by that 
sense or in that manner; 
  If it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must 
be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds: 
Provided that the opinions of experts expressed in any treaties commonly 
offered for sale and the grounds on which such opinions are held, may  be proved by 
the production of suc h treaties if the author is dead, or cannot be found, or has 
become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an 
amount of delay or expense which the Court regards as unreasonable: 
Provided further that, if oral evidence refers  to the existence or condition of 
any material thing other than a document, the Court may, if it thinks fit, require the 
production of such material thing for its inspection: 
Provided further that, if a witness is dead, or can not be found or has become 
incapable of giving evidence, or his attendance cannot , be procured without an 
amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case the Court 
regards as unreasonable, a party shall have the right to produce “shahada ala al -
shahadah” by which a witness can appoint two witnesses to depose on his behalf, 
except in the case of Hudood. 
CHAPTER V 
OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 
72.  Proof of contents of documents .– The contents of documents may be 
proved either by primary or by secondary evidence. 
73.  Primary evidence .– “Primary evidence” means the document itself produced 
for the inspection of the Court. 
Explanation 1 .– Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is 
primary evidence of the document.   
Where a document is executed in counterpar t, each counterpart being 
executed by one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence 
as against the parties executing it. 
Explanation 2 .– Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform 
process, as in the case of printing, lithography or photography, each is primary 
evidence of the contents of the rest; but , where they are all copies of a common 
original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original. 
Illustration 
A person is shown to have been in possession of  a number of placards, all 
printed at one time from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence of 
the contents of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents of 
the original. 
8
[Explanation 3 .– A print out or other form of out put of an automated information 
system shall not be denied the status of primary evidence solely for the reason that it 
was generated, sent, received or stored in electronic form if the automated 
information system was in working order at all materi al times and, for the purposes 
hereof, in the absence of evidence to the contrary it shall be presumed that the 
automated information system was in working order at all material times. 
Explanation 4.– A print out or other form of reproduction of an electro nic document, 
other than a document mentioned in Explanation 3 above, first generated, sent, 
received or stored in electronic form, shall be treated as primary evidence where a 
security procedure was applied thereto at the time it was generated, sent, rece ived 
or stored.]  
74.  Secondary evidence.– “Secondary evidence means and includes– 
(1)  certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained; 
(2)  copies made from the original by mechanical process which is 
themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with 
such copies;  
(3)  copies made from or compared with the original;  
(4)  counterparts of documents as against the p arties who did not execute 
them;  
(5)  oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who 
has himself seen it. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A photograph of an original is secondary evidence of its contents 
though the two have not been compared if it is proved that the thing 
photographed was the original.  
(b)  A copy, compared with a copy of a letter made by a copying machine is 
secondary evidence of the contents of the letter, if it is shown that the 
copy made by the copying machine was made from the original. 
                                                 
8Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 5; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary), pages 1127-1175. 
(c)  A copy transcribed from a copy, but afterwards compared with the 
original, is secondary evidence; but the copy not so compared is not 
secondary evidence of the original, although the copy from which it was 
transcribed was compared with the original. 
(d)  Neither an oral account of a copy compared with the original, nor an 
oral account of a ph otograph or machine -copy of the original, is 
secondary evidence of the original. 
75.  Proof of documents by primary evidence .– Documents must be proved by 
primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned. 
76.  Cases in which secondary evidence re lating to documents may be 
given.– Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of 
a document in the following cases:–  
(a)  when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power 
of the person against whom the do cument is sought to be proved, or of 
any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court, 
or of any person legally bound to produce it, and when , after the notice 
mentioned in Article 77 such person does not produce it; 
(b)  when the ex istence, condition or contents of the original have been 
proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is 
proved or by his representative in interest; 
(c)  when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party offering 
evidence o f its contents cannot, for any other reason not arising from 
his own default or neglect, produce it in reasonable time; 
(d)  when, due to the volume or bulk of the original, copies thereof have 
been made by means of microfilming or other modern devices; 
(e)  when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable; 
(f)  when the original is public document within the meaning of Article 85; 
(g)  when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted 
by this Order, or by any other law  in force in Pakistan, to be given in 
evidence; 
(h)  when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other documents 
which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and the fact to be 
proved is the general result of the whole collection; 
(i)  when an or iginal document forming part of a judicial record is not 
available and only a certified copy thereof is available, certified copy of 
that certified copy shall also be admissible as a secondary evidence. 
In cases (a), (c), (d) and (e), any secondary evidenc e of the contents of 
the document is admissible. 
In case (b), the written admission is admissible. 
In case (f) or (g), certified copy of the document, but no other kind of 
secondary evidence, is admissible. 
In case (h), evidence may be given as to the gene ral result of the 
documents by any person who has examined them , and who is skilled 
in the examination of such document. 
77.  Rules as to notice to produce .– Secondary evidence of the contents of the 
documents referred to in Article 76, paragraph (a), shal l not be given unless the party 
proposing to give such secondary evidence has previously given to the party in 
whose possession or power the document is, or to his advocate, such notice to 
produce it as is prescribed by Law ; and, if no notice is prescribed  by law, then such 
notice as the Court considers reasonable under the circumstances of the case:  
Provided that such notice shall not be required in order to render secondary 
evidence admissible in any of the following cases, or in any other case in which the 
Court thinks fit to dispense with it:– 
(1)  when the document to be proved is itself a notice; 
(2)  when, from the nature of the case, the adverse party must know that he 
will be required to produce it; 
(3)  when it appears or is proved that the advers e party has obtained 
possession of the original by fraud or force; 
(4)  when the adverse party or his agent has the original in Court; 
(5)  when the adverse party or his agent has admitted the loss of the 
document ; 
(6)  when the person in possession of th e document is out of reach of, or 
not subject to, the process of the Court. 
78.  Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or 
written document produced .– If a document is alleged to be signed or to have 
been written wholly or in p art by any person, the signature or the handwriting of so 
much of the document as is alleged to be in that person’s handwriting must be 
proved to be in his handwriting. 
9
[78–A. Proof of electronic signature and electronic document. – If an 
electronic document alleged to be signed or to have been generated holly or in part 
by any person through the use of an information system, and where such allegation 
is denied, the application of a security procedure to the signature or the electronic 
document must be proved.]  
79.  Proof of execution of document  required by law to be attested .– If a 
document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be used as evidence until two 
attesting witnesses of least have been called for the purpose of proving its execution, 
if there be two attesting witnesses alive, and subject to the process of the Court and 
capable of given evidence: 
Provided that it shall not be necessary to call an attesting witness in proof of 
the execution of any document, not being a will, which has bee n registered in 
accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 (XVI of 1908), unless its 
                                                 
9Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 6; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
execution by the person by whom it purports to have been executed is specifically 
denied. 
80.  Proof where no attesting witness found .– If no such attesting witness can 
be found, it must be proved that the witnesses have either died , or cannot be found 
and that the document was executed by the person who purports to have done so.  
81.  Admission of execution by party to attested document .– The admission of 
a party to an attested document of its execution by himself shall be sufficient proof of 
its execution as against him, though it be a document required by law to be attested. 
82.  Proof when attesting witness denies the execution .– If the attesting 
witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution 
may be proved by other evidence. 
83.  Proof of document not required by law to be attested .– An attested 
document not required by law to be attested may be proved as if it was unattested. 
84.  Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or 
proved.– (1) In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is that of the 
person by whom it purports to have been written or made any signature , writing or 
seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have been written or made 
by that person may be compared with the one which is to be proved, although that 
signature, writing or seal has not been produced or proved for any other purpose. 
(2)  The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or 
figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so 
written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person. 
(3)  This Article applies also, with  any necessary modifications, to finger -
impressions. 
85.  Public documents.– The following documents are public documents:– 
(1)  documents forming the acts or records of the acts– 
(i)  of the sovereign authority ; 
(ii)  of official bodies and tribunals, and 
(iii)  of public officers, legislative, Judicial and executive , of any part 
of Pakistan, or of a foreign country; 
(2)  public records kept in Pakistan of private documents; 
(3)  documents forming part of the records of judicial proceedings; 
(4)  documents required to be maintained by a public servant under any 
law; and 
(5)  registered documents the execution whereof is not disputed. 
10
[(6) certificates deposited in a repository pursuant to the provisions of the 
Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002.] 
                                                 
10Inserted by Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 (LI of 2002), w .e.f. 11.9.2002, s.29 and Schedule, Item 7; published in 
the Gazette of Pakistan (Extraordinary),  pages 1127-1175. 
86.  Private documents.– All other documents are private. 
87.  Certified copies of public documents .– Every public officer having the 
custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that 
person on demand a copy of it on payme nt of the legal fees therefore, together with 
a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such document or 
part thereof, as the case may be, and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed 
by such officer with his name and h is official title, and shall be sealed, whenever 
such officer is authorized by law to make use of a seal, and such copies so certified 
shall be called certified copies. 
Explanation.– Any officer, who, by the ordinary course of official duty, is authorized 
to deliver such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody of such documents 
within the meaning of this Article. 
88.  Proof of documents by production of certified Copies .– Such certified 
copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public docum ents or parts of 
the public documents of which they purport to be copies. 
89.  Proof of other public documents .– The following public documents may be 
proved as follows:–  
(1)  Acts, orders or notifications of the Federal Government in any of its 
departments, or of any Provincial Government or any department of 
any Provincial Government – by the records of the departments, 
certified by the heads of those departments respectively, or by any 
document purporting to be printed by order of any such Government; 
(2)  the proceedings of the Legislatures, –by the journal of those bodies 
respectively, or by published Acts or abstracts, by copies purporting to 
be printed by order of the Government concerned; 
(3)  the Acts of the Executive or the proceedings of the Legisl ature of a 
foreign country,–by journals published by their authority, or commonly 
received in that country as such or by a copy certified under the seal of 
the country or sovereign , or by a recognition thereof in some Federal 
Act; 
(4)  the proceedings of a  municipal body in Pakistan, –by a copy of such 
proceedings, certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book 
purporting to be published by the authority of such body; 
(5)  public documents of any other class in a foreign country, –by the 
original, or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, with a 
certificate under the seal of a notary public, or of a Pakistan Consul or 
diplomatic agent, that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the 
legal custody of the original, and upon proof  of the character of  the 
document according to the law of foreign country. 
PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS 
90.  Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies .– (1) The Court shall 
presume every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or ot her 
document, which is by law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular 
fact and which purports to be duly certified by any officer of the Federal Government 
or a Provincial Government to be genuine: 
Provided that such document is substantial ly in the form and purports to be 
executed in the manner directed by law in that behalf. 
(2)  The Court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such 
document purports to be signed or certified, held , when he signed it, the official 
character which he claims in such document. 
91.  Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence .– 
Whenever any document is produced before any Court, purporting to be a record or 
memorandum of the evidence, or of any part of the evidence, given by a wi tness in a 
judicial proceeding o r before any officer authorized by law to take such evidence or 
to be a  statement or confession by any prisoner or accused person, taken in 
accordance with law, and purporting to be signed by any Judge or Magistrate or by 
any such officer as aforesaid, the Court shall presume–  
that the document is genuine; that any statements as to the circumstances 
under which it was taken, purporting to be made by the person signing it , are true, 
and that such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken. 
92.  Presumption as to genuineness of documents kept under any law .– The 
Court shall presume the genuineness of every document purporting to be a 
document directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such document is kept 
substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody. 
93.  Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government .– 
The Court shall presume that map or plans purporting to be made by the authority of 
the Federal Government or any Provincia l Government were so made, and are 
accurate; but maps or plans made for the purposes of any cause must be proved to 
be accurate. 
94.  Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decision .– The 
Court shall presume the genuineness of every book purp orting to be printed or 
published under the authority of the Government of any country, and to contain any 
of the law of that country, and of every book purporting to contain reports of 
decisions of the Courts of such country. 
95.  Presumption as to powers -of-attorney.– The Court shall presume that 
every document purporting to be a power -of-attorney, and to have been executed 
before, and authenticated by, a notary public, or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, 
Pakistan 
11
Consul or Vice -Consul, or representative of the Federal Government, was 
so executed and authenticated. 
96.  Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records .– (1) The 
Court may presume that any document purporting to be a certified copy of any 
judicial record of any country not forming part of Pakistan is genuine and accurate, if 
the document purports to be certified in any manner which is certified by any 
                                                 
11The w ord misprinted in the Gazette as “Cousul” is corrected 
representative of the Federal Government in or for such country to be the manner 
commonly in use in that country for the certification of copies of judicial records. 
(2)  An officer who, with respect to any territory or place not forming part of 
Pakistan, is a political Agent therefore, as defined in section 3, clause (40), of the 
General Clauses Act, 1897(X of 1897) , shall for the pu rposes of clause (1), be 
deemed to be a representative of the Federal Government in or for the country 
comprising that territory or place. 
97.  Presumption as to books, maps and charts .– The Court may presume that 
any book to which it may refer for informa tion on matters of public or general interest, 
and that any published map or chart, the statements of which are relevant facts and 
which is produced for its inspection, was written and published by the person, and at 
the time and place, by whom or at which  it purports to have been written or 
published. 
98.  Presumption as to telegraphic messages .– The Court may presume that 
message, forwarded from a telegraph office to the person to whom such message 
purports to be addressed, corresponds with a message deli vered for transmission at 
the office from which the message purports to be sent; but the Court shall not make 
any presumption as to the person by whom such message was delivered for 
transmission. 
99.  Presumption as to due execution, etc., of document not produced.– The 
Court shall presume that every document called for and not produced after notice to 
produce, was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law. 
100.  Presumption as to documents thirty years old .– Where any document, 
purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the 
Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the 
signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in the 
handwriting of any particular person, is in that person’s handwriting, and , in the case 
of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the 
persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested. 
Explanation.– For the purposes of this Article and Arti cle 92, documents are sold to 
be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and under the care of the 
person with whom, they would naturally be; but no custody is improper if it is proved 
to have had, a legitimate origin, or if the circumstances of the particular case are 
such as to render such an origin probable. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A has been in possession of landed property for a long time. He 
produces from his custody deeds relating to the land, showing his titles to it. The 
custody is proper.  
(b)  A produce deeds relating to landed property of which he is the 
mortgage. The mortgagor is in possession. The custody is proper. 
(c)  A, a connection of B, produces deeds relating to lands in B’s 
possession which were deposited with him by B for safe custody. The custody is 
proper. 
101.  Certified copies of documents thirty years old .– The provisions of Article 
100 shall apply to such copy of a document referred to in that Article as is certified in 
the manner provided in Article 87 and is not less tha n thirty years old ; and such 
certified copy may be produced in proof of the contents of the document or part of 
the document of which purports to be a copy. 
CHAPTER VI 
OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE  
102.  Evidence of terms of contracts, g rants and other disposition of property 
reduced to form of document .– When the terms of a contract, or of a grant, or of 
any other disposition of property, have been reduced to the form of a document, and 
in all cases in which any matter is required by law  to be reduced to the form of a 
document, no evidence shall be given in proof of the terms of such contract, grant or 
other disposition  of property, or of such matter, except the document itself, or 
secondary evidence of its contents in cases in which seco ndary evidence is 
admissible under the provisions hereinbefore contained. 
Exception 1 .– When a public officer is required by law to be appointed in 
writing, and when it is shown that any particular person has acted as such officer, the 
writing by which he is appointed need not be proved. 
Exception 2 .– Wills admitted to probate in Pakistan may be proved by the 
probate. 
Explanation 1 .– This Article applies equally to cases in which the contracts, grants 
or dispositions of property referred to are contained in  one document and to cases in 
which they are contained in more documents that one. 
Explanation 2.–  Where there are more originals than one, one original only need be 
proved. 
Explanation 3 .– The statement, in any document whatever, of a fact other than the  
facts referred to in this Article, shall not preclude the admission of oral evidence as to 
the same fact. 
Illustrations 
(a)  If a contract be contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is 
contained must be proved. 
(b)  If a contract is contained in a bill of exchange, the bill of exchange must 
be proved. 
(c)  If a bill of exchange is drawn in a set of three, one only deed be 
proved. 
(d)  A contracts, in writing with B, for the delivery of indigo upon certain 
terms. The contract mentions the fact that B had paid A the price of other indigo 
contracted for verbally on another occasion. 
Oral evidence is offered that no payment was made for the other indigo. The 
evidence is admissible. 
(e)  A gives B a receipt for money paid by B. Oral evidence is  offered of the 
payment. The evidence is admissible. 
103.  Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement .– When the terms of any such 
contract, grant or other disposition of property, or any matter required by law to be 
reduced to the form of a document, have be en proved according to the last Article, 
no evidence of any oral agreement or statement shall be admitted, as between the 
parties to any such instrument or their representatives  in interest, for the purpose of 
contradicting, varying adding, to or subtracting from, its terms: 
Proviso(1).– Any fact may be proved which would invalidate any document, or 
which would entitle any person to any decree or order relating thereto; such as fraud, 
intimidation, illegality, want of due execution, want of capacity in any contracting 
party, want or failure of consideration, or mistake in fact or law. 
Proviso ( 2).– The existence of any separate oral agreement as to any matter 
on which a document is silent, and which is not inconsistent with its terms may be 
proved. In consid ering whether or not this proviso applies, the Court shall have 
regard to the degree of formality of the document. 
Proviso(3).– The existence of any separate oral agreement , constituting a 
condition precedent to the attaching of any obligation under any su ch contract, grant 
or disposition of property, may be proved. 
Proviso (4) .– The existence of any distinct subsequent oral agreement to 
rescind or modify any such contract, grant, or disposition of property, may be proved, 
except in cases in which such cont ract, grant or disposition of property is by law 
required to be in writing, or has been registered according to the law in force for the 
time being as to the registration of documents. 
Proviso (5) .– Any usage or custom by which incidents not expressly 
mentioned in any contract are usually annexed to contracts of that description, may 
be proved:  
Provided that the annexing of such incident would not be repugnant to, or 
inconsistent with the express terms of the contract. 
Proviso (6) .– Any fact may be proved which shows in what manner th e 
language of a document is 
12
related to existing facts. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A policy of insurance is affected on goods “in ships from Karachi to 
London”. The goods are shipped in a particular ship, which is last. The fact that t hat 
particular ship was orally excepted from the policy cannot be proved. 
(b)  A agrees absolutely in writing to pay B, Rs. 1,000 on the first March, 
1984. The fact that , at the same time, an oral agreement was made that the money 
should not be paid till the thirty-first March cannot be proved. 
(c)  An estate called “the Khanpur Estate” is sold by a deed, which contains 
a map of the property sold. The fact that land not included in the map had always 
been regarded as part of the estate and was meant to pass  by the deed cannot be 
proved. 
(d)  A enters into a written contract with B to work certain mines the 
property of B, upon certain terms. A was induced to do so by a misrepresentation of 
B’s as their value. This fact may be proved. 
                                                 
12The w ord misprinted “reliated” in the original Gazette corrected as “related”. 
(e)  A institutes a suit against B for the specific performance of a contract, 
and also prays that the contract may be reformed as to one of its provisions, as that 
provision was inserted in it by mistake. A may prove that such a mistake was made 
as would by law entitle him to have the contract reformed. 
(f)  A orders goods of B by a letter in which nothing is said as to the time of 
payment, and excepts the goods on delivery. B sues A for the price. A may show 
that the goods were supplied on credit for a term still unexpired. 
(g)  A sells B a horse and verbally warrants him sound. A gives B a paper 
in these words “Bought of a horse for Rs. 500″. B may prove the verbal warranty. 
(h)  A hires lodging of B, and gives a card on which is written “Rooms, Rs. 
200 a month.” A may prove a ve rbal agreement that these terms were to include 
partial board.  
A hires lodging of B for a year, and regularly stamped agreement, drawn up 
by an advocate, is made between them. It is silent on the subject of board. A may 
not prove that board was included in the terms verbally. 
(i)  A applies to B for a debt due to A by sending a receipt for the money. B 
keeps the receipt and does not send the money. In a suit for the amount A may 
prove this. 
(j)  A and B make a contract in writing to take effect upon the ha ppening of 
a certain contingency. The writing is left with B, who sues A upon it. A may show the 
circumstances under which it was delivered. 
104.  Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing 
facts.– When language used in a document is  plain in itself, and when it applied 
accurately to existing facts, evidence may not be given to show that it was not meant 
to apply to such facts. 
Illustrations 
A sells to B , by deed, “my estate at Rangpur containing 100 bighas”. A has an 
estate at Rangpur containing 100 bighas. Evidence may not be given of the fact that 
the estate meant to be sold was one situated at a different place and of a different 
size. 
105.  Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts .– 
When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference 
to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar sense. 
Illustrations 
A sells to B by deed, “my house in Karachi”. A had no house In Karachi, but it 
appears that he h ad a house at Keamari , of which B had been in possession since 
the execution of the deed. These facts may be proved to show that the deed related 
to the house at Keamari. 
106.  Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of 
several p ersons.–  When the facts are such that the language used might have 
been meant to apply to any one, and could not have been meant to apply to more 
than one, of several persons or things, evidence may be given of facts which show 
which of those persons or things it was intended to apply to. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A agrees to sell to B, for Rs. 1,000, “my white horse”. A has two white 
horses. Evidence may be given of facts which shows which of them was meant. 
(b)  A agrees to accompany B to Hyderabad. Evidence ma y be given of 
facts showing whether Hyderabad in the Dekkhan or Hyderabad Sind was meant. 
107.  Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts to 
neither of which the whole correctly applies .– When the language used applies 
partly to one set  of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the 
whole of it does not  apply correctly to either , evidence may be given to show to 
which of the two it was meant to apply. 
Illustrations 
A agrees to sell to B “my land at X in the occupation of Y”. A has land at X, 
but not in the occupation of Y, and he has  land in the occupation of Y, but it is not at 
X. Evidence may be given of facts which he meant to sell. 
108.  Evidence as to mea ning of illegible character , etc.– Evidence may be  
given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters, of 
foreign, obsolete, technical, local and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of 
words used in a peculiar sense. 
Illustrations 
A, a sculptor, agrees to sell to B, “ All may mods.” 
A has both models and modelling tools. Evidence may be given to show 
which he meant to sell. 
109.  Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document .–  
Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives  in interest, may 
give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying 
the terms of the document. 
Illustrations 
A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid 
for on delivery. At the same time they make an oral agreement that three months 
credit shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might 
be shown by C, if it affected his interest. 
110.  Saving of provisions of Succession Act relating to wills .– Nothing in this 
Chapter contained shall be taken to affect any of the provisions of the Succession 
Act, 1925 (XXXIX of 1925), as to the construction of wills. 
PART II 
ON PROOF 
CHAPTER VII 
FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED  
111.  Fact Judicially noticeable need not be proved .– No fact of which the Court 
will take judicial notice need be proved. 
112.  Facts of which Court must take judicial notice .– (1) The Court shall take 
judicial notice of the following facts:– 
(a)  All Pakistan laws; 
(b)  Articles of War for the Armed Forces; 
(c)  The co urse of proceeding of the Central Legislature and any 
Legislature established under any law for the time being in force in 
Pakistan; 
(d)  The seals of all the Courts in Pakistan and of all Courts out of Pakistan 
established by the authority of the Federal Government or the 
Government representative, the seals of Court of Admiralty and 
Maritime Jurisdiction and of Notaries Public and all seals which any 
person is authorised to use by any Act or Regulation having the force 
of law in Pakistan; 
(e)  The accessi on to office, names, titles, functions and signatures of the 
persons filling for the time being any public office in Pakistan, if the fact 
of their appointment to such office is notified in the official Gazette; 
(f)  The existence, title and  national flag of every State or  Sovereign 
recognised by the Federal Government; 
(g)  The divisions of time, the geographical divisions of the world, and 
public festivals, fasts and holidays notified in the official Gazette; 
(h)  The territories under the dominion of Pakistan;  
(i)  The commencement, continuance and termination of hostilities 
between Pakistan and any other State or body of persons; 
(j)  The names of the members and officers of the Court and of their 
deputies and subordinate officers and assistants, and al so of all 
officers acting in execution of its process, and of all advocates and 
other persons authorized by law to appear or act before it; 
(k)  The rule of the road on land or at sea. 
(2)  In all cases referred to in clause (1), and also on all matters of  public 
history, literature, science or art, the Court may resort for its aid to appropriate books 
or documents of reference. 
(3)  If the Court is called upon by any person to take judicial notice of any 
fact, it may refuse to do so unless and until such p erson produces any such book or 
document as it may consider necessary to enable it to do so. 
113.  Facts admitted need not be proved .– No fact need be proved in any 
proceeding which the parties thereto or their agents agree to admit at the hearing, or 
which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or 
which by any rule or pleading in force at the time they are deemed to have admitted 
by their pleadings: 
Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitt ed to be 
proved otherwise than by such admissions. 
CHAPTER VIII 
ESTOPPEL 
114.  Estoppel.– When one person has by his declaration, act or omission, 
intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to 
act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or 
proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth 
of that thing. 
Illustrations 
A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A , 
and thereby induces B to buy and pay for it. 
The land afterwards becomes the property of A, and A seeks to set aside the 
sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. He must not be 
allowed to prove his want of title. 
115.  Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession .– No tenant of 
immovable property, or person claiming through such tenant, shall, during the 
continuance of the tenancy, be permitted to deny that the landlord of such tenant 
had, at the beginning of the te nancy, a title to such immovable property; and no 
person who came upon any immovable property by the license of the person in 
possession thereof shall be permitted to deny that such person had a title to such 
possession at the time when such license was given. 
116.  Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange bailee or licensee .– No acceptor 
of a bill of exchange shall be permitted to deny that the drawer had authority to draw 
such bill or to endorse it; nor shall any bailee or licensee be permitted to deny th at 
his bailor or licenser had at the lime when the bailment or license commenced, 
authority to make such bailment or grant such license. 
Explanation 1.–  The acceptor of a bill of exchange may deny that the bill was really 
drawn by the person by whom it purports to have been drawn. 
Explanation 2 .–  If a bailee delivers the goods bailed to a person other than the 
bailor, he may prove that such person had a right to them as against the bailor. 
PART III 
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE 
CHAPTER IX 
OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF 
117.  Burden of proof .– (1) Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any 
legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must 
prove that those facts exist. 
(2)  When a person is bound to prove the existence  of any fact, it is said 
that the burden of proof lies on that person. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A desired a Court to give Judgment that B shall be punished for a 
crime which A says B has committed.  
A must prove that B has committed the crime. 
(b)  A desires a C ourt to give judgment that he is entitled to certain land in 
the possession of B by reason of facts which he asserts, and which B denies to be 
true. 
A must prove the existence of those facts. 
118.  On whom burden of proof lies .– The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding 
lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A sues B for land of which B is in possession, and which, as A asserts , 
was left to A by the will of C, B’s father. 
If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to retain his 
possession. Therefore the burden of proof is on A. 
(b)  A sues B for money due on a bond. 
The execution of the bond is admitted, but B says that it was obtained by 
fraud, which A denies.  
lf no evidence were given on either side, A would succeed as the bond is not 
disputed and the fraud is not proved. Therefore the burden of proof is on B. 
119.  Burden of proof as to particular fact .– The burden of proof as to any 
particular fact lies on that person wh o wishes the Court to believe in its existence, 
unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular 
person. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A prosecutes B for theft, and wishes the Court to believe that B 
admitted the theft, to C. A must prove the admission. 
(b)  B wishes the Court to believe that , at the time in question, he was 
elsewhere. He must prove it. 
120.  Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible .– The 
burden of proving any fact necessary to be proved i n order to enable any person to 
give evidence of any other fact is on the person who wishes to give such evidence. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A wishes to prove a dying declaration by B. A must prove B’s death. 
(b)  A wishes to prove, by secondary evidence, the con tents of a lost 
document. A must prove that the document has been lost. 
121.  Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions .– 
When a person is accused of any offence the burden of proving the existence of 
circumstances bringing the case wi thin any of the General Exceptions in the 
Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), or within any special exception or proviso 
contained in any other part of the same Code, or in any law defining the offence, is 
upon him, and the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. 
Illustrations 
(a)  “A” accused of murder, alleges that by reason of unsoundness of mind, 
he did not know the nature of the act. The burden of proof is on A.  
(b)  A, accused of murder, alleges that, by grave and sudden provocation , 
he was deprived of the power of self-control. The burden of proof is on A. 
(c)  Section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) , provides 
that whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335 voluntarily causes 
grievous hurt, shall be sub ject to certain punishments. A is charged with voluntarily 
causing grievous hurt under Section 325. The burden of proving the circumstances 
bringing the case under Section 336 lies on A. 
122.  Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge .– When any fact is 
especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is 
upon him. 
Illustrations 
(a)  When a person does an act with some intention other than that which 
the character and circumstances of the act suggest, the burden of prov ing that 
intention is upon him.  
(b)  A is charged with travelling on a railway without a ticket. The burden of 
proving that he had a ticket is on him. . 
123.  Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within 
thirty years.– Subject to Article 124, when the question is whether a man is alive or 
dead, and it is shown that he was alive within thirty years, the burden of proving that 
he is dead is on the person who affirms it. 
124.  Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for 
seven years .– When the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is proved 
that he has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have 
heard of him if he had been alive, the burden of proving that he is alive is shifted to 
the person who affirms it. 
125.  Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and 
tenant, principal and agent .– When the question is whether persons are partners , 
landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been show n that they have 
been acting as such, the burden of proving that they do not stand, or have ceased to 
stand, to each other in those relationships respectively , is on the person who affirms 
it. 
126.  Burden of proof as to ownership .– When the question is wh ether any 
person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of 
proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the 
owner. 
127.  Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation o f 
active confidence .– When there is a question as to the good faith of a transaction 
between parties, one of whom stands to the other in a position of active confidence 
the burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the party who is in a 
position of active confidence. 
Illustrations 
(a)  The good faith of a sale by a client to an advocate is in question in a 
suit brought by the client. The burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is 
on the advocate. 
(b)  The good faith of a sale by a son just come of age to a father is in 
question in a suit brought by the son. The burden of proving the good faith of the 
transaction is on the father. 
128.  Birth during marriage conclusive proof of legitimacy .– (1) The fact that 
any person was born dur ing the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother 
and any man and not earlier than the expiration of six lunar months from the date of 
the marriage, or within two years after its dissolution, the mother remaining 
unmarried, shall be conclusive pro of that he is the legitimate child of that man, 
unless– 
(a)  the husband had refused, or refuses, to own the child; or 
(b)  the child was born after the expiration of six lunar months from the date 
on which the woman had accepted that the period of iddat h ad come to 
an end. 
(2)  Nothing contained in clause (1) shall apply to a non -Muslim if it is 
inconsistent with his faith. 
129.  Court may presume existence of certain facts .– The Court may presume 
the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have ha ppened, regard being had to 
the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private 
business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case. 
Illustrations 
The Court may presume– 
(a)  that a man who is in possession of stolen goods  soon after the theft is 
either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, 
unless he can account for his possession ; 
(b)  that an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in 
material particulars ; 
(c)  that a bill of  exchange, accepted or endorsed, was accepted or 
endorsed for good consideration; 
(d)  that a 
13
thing or state of things which has been shown to be in existence 
within a period shorter than that within which such things or states of 
things usually cease to exist, is still in existence ; 
                                                 
13Misprinted in official Gazette as “think”. 
(e)  that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed ; 
(f)  that the common course of business has been followed in particular 
cases; 
(g)  that evidence which could be and is not produced would, if produced, 
be unfavourable to the person who withholds it ; 
(h)  that, if a man refuses to answer a question which he is not compelled 
to answer by law, the answer, if given, would be unfavourable to him; 
(i)  that when a document creating an obligation is in the hands of the 
obligor, the obligation has been discharged. 
But the Court shall also have regard to such facts as the following, in 
considering whether such maxims do or do not apply to the particular 
case before it; 
as to illustration (a) .– a shopkeeper has in hi s till marked rupee soon 
after it was stolen, and cannot account for its possession specifically, 
but is continually receiving rupees in the course of his business ; 
as to illustration (b) .– A, person of the highest character, is tried for 
causing a man’s death by an act of negligence in arranging certain 
machinery, B, a person of equally good character, who also took part in 
the arrangement, describes precisely what was done, and admits and 
explains the common carelessness of A and himself ; 
as to illustra tion (b) .– a crime is committed by several persons. A, B 
and C , three of the criminals, are captured on the shop and kept apart 
from each other. Each gives an account of the crime implicating D and 
the accounts corroborate each other in such a manner as to  render 
previous concert highly improbable; 
as to illustration (c).– A. the drawer of a bill of exchange, was a man of 
business. B , the acceptor, was a young and ignorant person, 
completely under A’s influence; 
as to illustration (d).– It is proved that a river ran in a certain course five 
years ago,  but is known that there have been floods since that time 
which might change its course ; 
as to illustration (e) .– a judicial act, the regularity of which is in 
question, was performed under exceptional circumstances ; 
as to illustration (f).– the question is, whether a letter was received. It is 
shown to have been posted, but the usual course of the post was 
interrupted by disturbances; 
as to illustration (g) .– a man refuses to produce a document which 
would bear on a contract of small  importance on which he is sued,  but 
which might also injure the feelings and reputation of his family; 
as to illustration (h)  .– a man refuses to answer a question which he is 
not compelled by law to answer, but the answer to it mi ght cause loss 
to him in matters unconnected with the matter in relation to which it is 
asked ; 
as to illustration (i) .– a bond is in possession of the obligor, but the 
circumstances of the case are such that he may have stolen it. 
CHAPTER X 
OF THE EXAMINATION OF WITNESS  
130.  Order of production and examination of witnesses .– The order in which 
witnesses are produced and examined shall be regulated by the law and practice, for 
the time being relating to civil and criminal procedure respectively, and, in th e 
absence of any such law, by the discretion of the Court. 
131.  Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence .– (1) When either party 
proposes to give evidence of any fact, the Judge may ask the party proposing to give 
the evidence in what manner the al leged fact, if proved, would be relevant, and the 
Judge shall admit the evidence if he thinks that the fact, if proved, would be relevant 
and not otherwise. 
(2)  If the fact proposed, to be proved is one of which evidence is 
admissible only upon proo f of s ome other fact, such last -mentioned fact must be 
proved before evidence is given of the fact first -mentioned, unless the party 
undertakes to give proof of such fact, and the Court is satisfied with such 
undertaking. 
(3)  If the relevancy of one alleged fac t depends upon an other alleged fact 
being first proved, the Judge may , in his discretion, either permit evidence of the first 
fact to be given before the second fact is proved, or require evidence to be given of 
the second fact before evidence is given of the first fact. 
Illustrations 
(a)  It is proposed to prove a statement about a relevant fact by a person 
alleged to be dead, which statement is relevant under Article 46. 
The fact that the person is dead must be proved by the person proposing to 
prove the statement, before evidence is given of the statement. 
(b)  It is proposed to prove, by a copy, the contents of a document said to 
be lost. 
The fact that the original is lost must be proved by the person proposing to 
produce the copy, before the copy is produced. 
(c)  A is accused of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been 
stolen. 
It is proposed to prove that he denied the possession of the property. 
The relevancy of the denial depends on the identity of the property. The Court 
may, in its discret ion, either require the property to be identified before the denial of 
the possession is proved or permit the denial of possession to be proved before the 
property is identified. 
(d)  It is proposed to prove a fact (A) which is said to have been the cause 
or effect of a fact -in-issue. There are several intermediate facts (B, C and D) which 
must be shown to exist before the fact (A) can be regarded as the cause or effect of 
the fact-in-issue. 
The Court may either permit A to be proved before B, C or D is pro ved, or 
may require proof of B, C and D before permitting proof of A. 
132.  Examination-in-chief, etc .– (1) The examination of a witness by the party 
who calls him shall be called his examination-in-chief. 
(2)  The examination of a witness by the adverse p arty shall be called his 
cross-examination. 
(3)  The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross -examination by 
the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination. 
133.  Order of examinations .– (1) Witnesses shall be first examined -in-chief, then 
(if the adverse party so desires) cross -examined, then (if the party calling him so 
desires) re-examined. 
(2)  The examination and cross -examination must relate to relevant facts 
but the cross -examination need not be confined to the facts to which t he witness 
testified on his examination-in-chief. 
(3)  The re -examination shall be directed to the explanation of matters 
referred to in cross -examination; and, if new matter is, by permission of the Court, 
introduced in re -examination, the adverse party m ay further cross -examine that 
matter. 
134.  Cross-examination of person called to produce a document .– A person 
summoned to produce a document does not become a witness by the mere fact that 
he produces it and cannot be cross -examined unless and until he i s called as a 
witness. 
135.  Witnesses to character .– Witnesses to character may be cross -examined 
and re-examined. 
136.  Leading questions .– Any question suggesting the answer which the person 
putting in wishes or expects to receive is called a leading question. 
137.  When leading questions must not be asked .– (1) Leading questions must 
not, if objected to by the adverse party, be asked in an examination -in-chief, or in a 
re-examination, except with the permission of the Court. 
(2)  The Court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are 
introductory or undisputed, or which have in its opinion, been already sufficiently 
proved. 
138.  When leading questions may be asked .– Leading questions may be asked 
in cross examination. 
139.  Evidence as to matt ers in writing .– Any witness may be asked, whilst under 
examination, whether any contract, grant or other disposition of property, as to which 
he is giving evidence, was not contained in a document, and if he says that it was, or 
if he is about to make any  statement as to the contents of any document, which in 
the opinion of the Court, ought to be produced, the adverse party may object to such 
evidence being given until such document is produced, or until facts have been 
proved which entitle the party who c alled the witness to give secondary evidence of 
it.  
Explanation.– A witness may give oral evidence of statements made by other 
persons about the contents of documents if such statements are in themselves 
relevant facts. 
Illustration 
The question is, whether A assaulted B.  
C deposes that he heard A say to D –“B wrote a letter accusing me of theft, 
and I will be revenged on him”. This statement is relevant, as showing A’s motive for 
the assault, and evidence may be given of it , though no other evidence is giv en 
about the letter. 
140.  Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing .– A witness may 
be cross -examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or reduce into 
writing, and relevant to matters in question, without such writing being sho wn to him, 
or being proved; but, if it is intended to contradict him by the writing, his attention 
must, before the writing can be proved, be called to those parts of it which are to be 
used for the purpose of contradicting him. 
141.  Questions lawful in c ross-examination.– When a witness is cross -
examined, he may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked 
any questions which tend– 
(1)  to test his veracity, 
(2)  to discover who he is and what is his position in life, or 
(3)  to shake his credit, by injuring his character, although the answer to 
such questions might tend directly or indirectly to criminate him or 
might expose or tend directly or indirectly to expose him to a penalty or 
forfeiture. 
142.  When witness to be compelled to a nswer.– if any such question relates to 
a matter relevant to the suit or proceeding, the provisions of Article 15 shall apply 
thereto. 
143.  Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness 
compelled to answer .– If any such question relates to  a matter not relevant to the 
suit or proceeding,  except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by injuring 
his character, the Court shall decide whether or not the witness shall be compelled to 
answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warn the wit ness that he is not obliged to answer it. 
In exercising its discretion, the Court shall have regard t o the following 
considerations:– 
(1)  such questions are proper if they are of such a nature that the truth of 
the imputation conveyed by them would seriou sly effect the opinion of 
the Court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he 
testifies; 
(2)  such questions are improper if the imputation which they convey 
relates to matters so remote in time, or of such a character, that the 
truth of the imputation would not affect, or would affect in slight degree, 
the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter 
to which he testifies; 
(3)  such questions are improper if there is a great disproportion between 
the importance of the importation made against the witness’s character 
and the importance of his evidence;  
(4)  the Court may, if it sees fit, draw , from the witness’s refusal to answer, 
the inference that the answer if given would be unfavourable. 
144.  Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds .– No such question 
as is referred to in Article 143 ought to be asked, unless the person asking it has 
reasonable grounds for thinking that the imputation which it conveys is well founded. 
Illustrations 
(a)  An advocate is instructed by an attorney that an important witness is a 
dakait. This is a reasonable ground for asking the witness whether he is a dakiat. 
(b)  An advocate is informed by a person in Court that an important witness 
is a dakait. The informant, on be ing questioned by the advocate, given satisfactory 
reasons for his statement. This is a reasonable ground for asking the witness 
whether he is a dakait. 
(c)  A witness, of whom nothing whatever is known, is asked at random 
whether he is a dakait. There are here no reasonable grounds for the question. 
(d)  A witness, of whom nothing whatever is known, being questioned as to 
his mode of life and means of living, gives unsatisfactory answers. This may be a 
reasonable ground for asking him if he is a dakait. 
145.  Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable 
grounds.– If the Court is of opinion that any such question was asked without  
reasonable grounds, it may, if it was asked by any advocate, report the 
circumstances of the case to the  High Court or other authority to which such 
advocate is subject in the exercise of his profession. 
146.  Indecent and scandalous questions .– The Court may forbid any question or 
inquiries which it regards as indecent or scandalous, although such questions  or 
inquiries may have some bearing on the questions before the Court unless they 
relate to facts -in-issue, or to matters necessary to be known in order to determine 
whether or not the facts-in-issue existed. 
147.  Procedure of Court in cases of defamation  libel and slander .– When a 
person is prosecuted or used for making or publishing an imputation of a defamatory, 
libellous or slanderous nature, the Court shall not, before it has recorded its findings 
on the issues whether such person did make or publish such imputation, and 
whether such imputation is true, permit any question to be put to any witness for the 
purpose of injuring the character of the person in respect of whom such imputation 
has, or is alleged to have , been made, or any other person, whether dead or alive, in 
whom he is interested, except in so far as any such question may be necessary for 
the purpose of determining the truth of the imputations alleged to have been made or 
published. 
148.  Questions intended to insult or annoy .– The Court sh all forbid any 
question which appears to it to be intended to insult or annoy, or which , though 
proper in itself, appears to the Court needlessly offensive in form. 
149.  Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing 
veracity.– When a witness has been asked and has answered any question which is 
relevant to the inquiry only in so far as it tends to shake his credit by injuring his 
character, no evidence shall be given to contradict him; but , if he answers falsely, he 
may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence. 
Exception 1 .–  If a witness is asked whether he has been previously convicted 
of any crime denies it, evidence may be given of his previous conviction. 
Exception 2 .– If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his  
impartiality and answers it by denying the suggested, he may be contradicted. 
Illustrations 
(a) A claim against an underwriter is resisted on the ground of fraud.  
The claimant is asked whether, in a former transaction, he had not made a 
fraudulent claim. He denies it. 
Evidence is offered to show that he did make such a claim. 
The evidence is inadmissible. 
(b)  A witness is asked whether he was not dismissed from a situation for 
dishonesty. 
He denies it. 
Evidence is offered to show that he was dismissed for dishonesty. 
The evidence is not admissible. 
(c)  A affirms that on a certain day he saw B at Lahore. 
A is asked whether he himself was not on that day at Faisalabad. He denies 
it. 
Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at Faisalabad. 
The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which affects his 
credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on the day in question in 
Lahore. 
In each of these cases the witness might, if his denial was false, be charged 
with giving false evidence. 
(d)  A is asked whether his family has not had a blood feud with the family 
of D against whom he gives evidence. 
He denies it. He may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to 
impeach his impartiality. 
150.  Question by party to  his own witness .– The Court may, in its discretion, 
permit the person who calls a witness to put any questions to him which might be put 
in cross-examination by the adverse party. 
151.  Impeaching credit of witness .– The credit of a witness may be impeach ed 
in the following ways by the adverse party , or, with the consent of the Court, by the 
party who calls him: 
(1)  by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge 
of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit; 
(2)  by proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the offer of 
a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement to give his 
evidence; 
(3)  by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence 
which is liable to be contradicted; 
(4)  when a man is prosecuted for rape or an attempt to ravish, it may be 
shown that the prosecutrix was of generally immoral character. 
Explanation.– A witness declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit may not, 
upon his examination-in-chief, give reas ons for his belief, but he may be asked his 
reasons in cross - examination, and the answers which he gives cannot be 
contradicted, though, if they are false, he may afterwards be charged with giving 
false evidence. 
Illustrations 
(a)  A sues B for the price of goods sold and delivered to B. C says that A 
delivered the goods to B. 
Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, he said that he had 
not delivered the goods to B. 
The evidence is admissible. 
(b)  A is indicated for the murder of B. 
C says that B, when dying, declared that A had given B the wound of which 
he died. 
Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, C said that the 
wound was not given by A or in his presence. 
The evidence is admissible. 
152.  Questions tending to corr oborate evidence of relevant fact admissible .– 
When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant 
fact, he may be questioned as to any other circumstances which he observed at or 
near to the time or place at which such relevan t fact occurred if the Court is of 
opinion that such  circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the 
witness as to the relevant fact which he testifies. 
Illustrations 
A, on accomplice, gives an account of robbery in which he took part . He 
describes various incidents unconnected with the robbery which occurred on his way 
to and from the place where it was committed.  
Independent evidence of these facts may be given in order to corroborate his 
evidence as to the robbery itself. 
153.  Former s tatements of witness may be proved to corroborate later 
testimony as to same fact .– In order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any 
former statement made by such witness relating to the same fact at or about the time 
when the fact took place, or be fore any authority legally competent to investigate the 
facts, may be proved. 
154.  What matters may be proved in connection with proved statement 
relevant under Article 46 or 47 .–  Whenever any statement, relevant under Article 
46 or 47, is proved, all ma tters may be proved either in order to contradict or 
corroborate it, or in order to impeach or confirm the credit of the person by whom it 
was made, which might have been proved if that person had been called as a 
witness and had denied upon cross-examination the truth of the matter suggested. 
155.  Refreshing memory .– (1) A witness may, while under examination, fresh his 
memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction 
concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterward s that the Court considers it 
likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory. 
(2)  The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other 
person, and read by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read if he knew 
it to be correct.   
(3)  Whenever a witness may refresh his memory by reference to any 
document, he may , with the permission of the Court, refer to a copy of such 
document: 
Provided the Court be satisfied that there is sufficient reason for the non -
production of the original. 
(4)  An expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional 
treaties. 
156.  Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in Article 155 .– A 
witness may also testify to facts mentioned in any such document as is mentioned in 
Article 155, although he has no specific recollection of the facts themselves, if he is 
sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document. 
Illustrations 
A book -keeper may testify to facts record ed by him in books regularly ke pt in 
the course of busine ss, if he knows that the books were correctly kept, although he 
has forgotten the particular transactions entered. 
157.  Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory .– Any writing 
referred to under the provisions of the two last proceeding A rticles must be produced 
and shown to the adverse party if he requires it such party may, if he pleases, cross –
examine the witness thereupon. 
158.  Production of documents .– (1) A witness summoned to produce a 
document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding 
any objection which there may be to its production or to in its admissibility. The 
validity of any objection shall be decided on by the Court. 
(2)  The Court, if it sees fit may inspect the document , unless it refe rs to 
matters of State, or take other evidence to enable it to determine on its admissibility.   
(3)  If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be 
translated, the Court may, if it thinks fit, direct the translator to keep the contents 
secret, unless the document is to be given in evidence; and , if the translator 
disobeys such direction, he shall be held to have committed an offence under 
Section 166 of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860). 
159.  Giving, as evidence of document call ed for and produced on notice .– 
When a party calls for a document which he has given the other party notice to 
produce, and such document is produced and inspected by the party calling for its 
production, he is bound to give it as evidence if the party pro ducing it requires him to 
do so. 
160.  Using, as evidence, of document production of which was refused on 
notice.– When a party refuses to produce, a document which he has had notice to 
produce, he cannot afterwards use the document as evidence without the consent of 
the other party or the order of the Court. 
Illustrations 
A sues B on an agreement and gives B  three notice to produce it. At the trial 
A calls for the document and B refuses to produce it. A gives secondary evidence of 
its contents. B seeks to produce the document itself to contradict the secondary 
evidence given by A, or in order to show that the agreement is not stamped. He 
cannot do so. 
161.  Judge’s power to put questions or order production .– The Judge may, in 
order to discover or to obtain  proper proof of relevant facts, ask any question he 
places, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties about any fact 
relevant or irrelevant; and may order the production of any document or thing; and 
neither the parties nor their agents shall be entitled to make any objection to any 
such question or order, nor, without the leave of the Court, to cross -examine any 
witness upon any answer given in reply to any such question: 
Provided that the Judgment must be based upon facts declared by th is Order 
to be relevant, and duly proved: 
Provided also that this Article shall not authorise any Judge to compel any 
witness to answer any question or to produce any document which such witness 
would be entitled to refuse to answer or produce under Articl es 4 to 14, both 
inclusive, if the question were asked or the document were called for by the adverse 
party; nor shall the judge ask any question which it would be improper for any other 
person to ask  under Article 143 or 144; nor shall he dispense with pr imary evidence 
of any document, except in the cases hereinbefore excepted. 
CHAPTER XI 
OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE  
162.  No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence .– The 
improper admission or rejection of evidence shall  not be ground of itself for a new 
trial or reversal of any decision in any case, if it shall appear to the Court before 
which such objection is raised that, independent of the evidence objected to and 
admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the  decision, or that, if the rejected 
evidence had been received, it ought not to have varied the decision. 
CHAPTER XII 
DECISION OF CASE ON THE BASIS OF OATH  
163.  Acceptance or denial of claim on oath .– (1) When the plaintiff takes oath in 
support of his cl aim, the Court shall, on the application of the plaintiff, call upon the 
defendant to deny the claim on oath. 
(2)  The Court may pass such orders as to costs and other matters as it 
may deem fit. 
(3)  Nothing in this Article applies to laws relating to the  enforcement of 
Hudood or other criminal cases. 
CHAPTER XIII 
MISCELLANEOUS 
164.  Production of evidence that has become available because of modern 
devices, etc .– In such cases as the Court may consider appropriate, the Court may  
allow to  be produced any e vidence that may have become available because of  
modern devices or techniques. 
165.  Order to override other laws .– The provisions of this Order shall have effect 
notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force. 
166.  Repeal.– The Evidence Act, 1872 (I of 1872), is hereby repealed.