Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated.

What this section does

Evidence given by a witness in a prior judicial proceeding (or before a person authorised by law to take evidence) is relevant in a subsequent proceeding or a later stage of the same proceeding to prove the truth of the facts stated, when the witness is dead, cannot be found, is incapable of giving evidence, has been kept away by the adverse party, or cannot be produced without unreasonable delay or expense. Three conditions must be satisfied: the proceedings must be between the same parties or their representatives in interest; the adverse party must have had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; and the questions in issue must have been substantially the same.

AI-generated plain-language summary. For the binding statutory text, see India Code (official).

The rule in one line

Prior testimony of an unavailable witness is admissible in a subsequent proceeding between the same parties if the adverse party had the opportunity to cross-examine on substantially the same issues.

When it applies

• A witness testifies in a civil suit between A and B and is cross-examined; the witness later dies — the recorded testimony is relevant in a subsequent suit between A and B on the same issue.
• A witness gives evidence in a criminal trial; the accused is retried after the first conviction is set aside and the witness has since died — the earlier testimony may be used in the retrial.

Derived from IEA s.33.