Section 167 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 speaks about, “No new trail for improper admission or rejection of evidence”. This section says

• Improper admission or rejection of evidence is not a ground for initiating a new trial or reversal of any decision;
• If there were enough evidence to justify the decision; or
• If the evidence that has been rejected had been received;
• The evidence rejected or improperly submitted should not be so significant that the decision could have been different if it was admitted.

Therefore, if an appeal is filed on the ground of improper exclusion of evidence or admission of evidence, the appellant must be able to prove that:

• There was improper admission or exclusion of evidence, and
• There has been a mockery of justice.

The object of this section is that “technical objections will not be allowed to prevail where substantial justice has been done.” The section applies to civil as well as criminal cases. The matter of wrongful rejection or admission of evidence can be raised either before a court of review or appellate court. It may be noted that Section 99, C.P.C. also provides that no decision is to be disturbed in appeal unless there is an error which affects the merits of the case. Section 465 of Cr.P.C. provides that a decision can be reopened on the ground of failure of justice and not otherwise.

Note: The Repealing Act, 1938, has repealed Section 2 and Schedule.

Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh ¹⁾

In this case the question before the court was whether tape recordings or photographs procured by illegal means is admissible.The court held that If the evidence is admissible, it does not matter how it has been obtained. It is a settled legal proposition that even if any evidence is procured by improper or illegal means, there is no bar to its admissibility if it is relevant and its genuineness is proved.

• Adv. Abhishek Gupta (Natraj Legal Solutions)
• Delhi High Court
• Ph: 9999052336,8700521407
• E-mail: adv.abhishek3995@gmail.com