Doctrine of Res Gestae

Meaning of Res Gestae:

The term 'Res' is a Latin word which means "thing" and the expression
"Res Gestae" literally which means “the thing done, a subject matter, a
transaction or essential circumstances surrounding the subject". In the law
of evidence, it means things done including words spoken, forming part of
the same transaction. There is a fact story behind every case before the
court of law. In (fact story) contains certain acts, omissions or statements,
which are not in issue but are capable of throwing some light on the nature
of the transaction revealing its true quality and character. Such acts,
omissions, or statements from part of the same transaction in issue and are
allowed to be proved.

Definition of Res Gestae:

Halsbury defines 'Res gaste' as "Facts which form part of the res
gestae and are consequently provable as facts relevant to the issue ;
include acts , declarations and incidents which themselves constitute or
accompany and explain the facts or transaction in issue.

S. 6 embodies the rule of Admission of Evidence know as Res

gestae. This phrase means simply a transaction, thing done, subject matter
Res gestae of any case properly consist of that portion of actual happening
of the world out of the rights or liability, complained or asserted in the
proceeding, necessarily, arise. The principle underlying S. 6, is sometimes
termed as Res gestae. This phrase of Res gestae is well established in the
law of Evidence. This phrase has been used in two senses. In the restricted
senses it means world's happening out of which the right or liability in
question arises. In the wider sense it covers all the probative facts by which
res gestae are reproduced to the tribunal where the Direct Evidence of
witness or perception by the Court are unattainable. In restricted meaning
Res gestae imports the conception of action by some person producing the
effects for which the liability is sought to be enforced an action. To be clear,
in the restricted sense "facts which constitute the res gestae must be such
as so connected with the very transaction or fact under investigation as to
constitute a part of it." Whatever act or series of acts constitute, or in point
of time immediately accompany and terminate in. The principle Act charged
as an offence against the accused from its inception to its consummation
and whatever may be said by either of the parties during the continuance of
the transaction, with reference to it, including herein what may be said by
the suffering party, though in absence of the accused during the continuance
of the action or the latter, from part of the principle transaction and may be
given in Evidence as part of Res gestae of it. While, on the other hand,
statements made by the complaining party, after all action on the part of
wrong-doer has ceased and some time has elapsed do not form part of Res
gestae and should be excluded.

The acts and Declarations accompanying the transaction or the facts

in issue are treated as Res gestae and admitted in Evidence. But the fact
deposed must form part of the transaction and must be made at the same
time with the act immediately after it.
Relevant Case Law:

Supreme Court in Punjabrao v. D P Meshram, AIR 1965 SC 1179, held

that the Evidence of the conversion of a member of Scheduled Caste to
Buddhism may be Corroborated by the Evidence of his conduct subsequent
to his conversion. In Pershadi v. State , AIR 1957 SC 211, held that in a
case of murder soon after the murder the accused who had earlier held out
of a threat to the victim told the father of the victim that he had a hand in
this appearance of the accused, is Admissible u/s. 6 of the Indian Evidence
Act.

Supreme Court in Chander Kala v. Ram Kishan, AIR SC 1268, held

that when the complainant narrated the incident to the relative of the
deceased and he deposed to that effect in Court, such Evidence is Admissible
in Evidence.

In state of Andhra Pradesh v. Panna Satyanarayan, AIR 2000 SC

2138 , held that when the accused murdered his wife and daughter, the
statement by the father of the deceased wife that father of the accused told
him on telephone that his son has killed the deceased. Absence of a finding
as to whatever information given by accused's father to the deceased's
father that the accused had killed the deceased was either of the time of
commission of the crime or immediately thereafter. So as to form the part of
the same transaction, the statement cannot be considered as relevant u/s.
6.
 In Mahendra pal v. State, AIR 1955 All. 328, the place where a
murder was committed by number of persons apart from the deceased and
witnesses. Those came up immediately after and were informed by the eye
witnesses as to who the two culprits had been. The statements of those
persons were held to be Admissible u/s, 6.

Conditions:

A Statement to be admissible under Section.6, the following conditions are

to be satisfied:

1) The statement must be a statement of fact and not opinion

2) The statement must have been made by a participant or witness of the

transaction.

3) The statement made by bystander is Admissible, if he was present at the

scene of the offense.
4) The statement must explain, elucidate or characterize the incident in the
same manner.

2222900