top of page

Comparative Analysis Of The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 And The Indian Evidence Act, 1872




Mohd Uwais Saifi, Amity University Noida


ABSTRACT


This paper compares the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 with the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, emphasizing the latter's advancements and distinctions. The inclusion of digital forms in the classifications of evidence and the establishment of clear criteria for the admission of electronic data are two significant changes. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam also reassesses how confessions are handled, shifting toward a more nuanced strategy that strikes a compromise between the requirement for efficient law enforcement and individual rights. The Indian Evidence Act's provisions 25, 26, and 27 are grouped together to provide a logical structure for the admission of confessions. This framework emphasises protections against coercion while allowing exceptions under certain circumstances. This research emphasises how legal systems must adapt to new developments in technology and society to maintain the accessibility and equity of justice. All things considered, the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam is a step in the right direction toward India's more flexible and all-encompassing legal system.



Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Licensing: 

 

All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page