The principle of Res gestae
The principle of Res gestae
NEW DELHI :- Section 6 of the Evidence Act is based on the principle of the Anglo Law, which is called the principle of res gestae. Apart from this clause, this term is not used anywhere in the Evidence Act but the interpretation of this principle is found in other sections.
Res gestae – Res gestae is a Latin word meaning work that has been done and the English formula means “statements and actions done in the same transaction of words”.
Here the meaning of practice is all these things which are related to each other and which have occurred after or before the time of committing the crime but are related to the real crime like (b) beating and killing ( A) The accused is (a) or (b) whatever was said before or after the beating by people standing nearby becomes part of the same behavior
When a practice such as a contract or a crime is a disputable fact, evidence can be given for each such fact which is part of the same practice.
As far as the act or omission of behavior is concerned, no special hardship arises. The nature of the practice makes it clear what is its essential part. Suppose there is a conspiracy to change the Government of India by force for this purpose. Money is deposited in Kolkata, Yantra is given in Madras and training is given in Mumbai. All these tasks, even though they are far apart in each other’s time and place, are still part of the same time.
Applying this principle, the court must act very carefully. Caution is necessary because there is no delay in making a false statement, therefore it is a theory that the statement was made only before or after the incident or that it happened to the person. Do not save time and there is no time to create a false story.
6. Relevancy of facts forming part of same 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
In Ratan v. Queen 1971,
The statement of the accused of killing his wife in this suit was that the bullet accident happened. The evidence was that the deceased wife shook the telephone and told the operator that the police had given me the operator had not done anything yet. Spoke his address and the talk was over, on the information of the operator, the police went there and recovered the body of the woman, it was decided that telephone and asking the police is relevant as part of the practice of murder.
R. Vs Foster 1834
In this suit, the accused was accused of killing a person by driving his car over him. The witness stated that he had seen the car running at very high speed but had not seen the accident as soon as he saw the injured person. Hearing the sound of the groan, they run to him and the deceased tells him about the accident. The court determined that whatever the deceased told about the incident is relevant under Section 6.
It is clear from the above that if an offense has been committed by an accused, then the facts relating to the crime are to be included in the evidence which are considered part of the practice and are consistent in the evidence.