“Law Master’s Publications
The Relevancy of facts
Prof. .S. D. Bhosale
26
The Doctrine of Res-Gestae: -
This section incorporates the English Law doctrine of Res-Gestae. The doctrine of
'Res-Gestae' means things done, including words spoken, forming part of the same
transaction (Crime, Tort, Contract, etc.). A transaction is a group of facts so connected as
to be called by a single legal name as a crime, a contract, wrong, or any other subject of
inquiry that may be in issue.
Ss.6, 7, 8, and 9 give various ways in which the facts are so related to each other as
to form components of the fact in the issue. Sections 7, 8, and 9 illustrate S. 6 in detail. The
core of these sections in English Law is described by the doctrine of ‘Res-Gestae’.
Each case before the court consists of several facts. These facts may be in the form
of acts, opinions, and statements. When evidence is given of such acts, opinions or
statements, although they are not in issue, can throw some light upon the nature of the
transaction. Such Acts, opinions, or statements are considered part of the same transaction
(i.e. crime, tort, etc.). The court admits these facts in evidence.
To get an idea of the doctrine clearly, we will discuss it by illustration (a). When
one is beating another in the spurt of a moment, one may utter to the other, "I will kill you,"
and the other may be crying," Save me, save me," or "Don't kill me." Some bystanders
appearing on the scene may be remarking, "Oh! Don't beat; he would die."
In fact, these remarks of A, B, and bystanders are not in issue, but they are so
connected with the fact in issue as to form the same transaction of beating, therefore
becoming admissible under S.6.
While applying the principle of Res-Gestae to the statements, the statements should have
been made so soon before, after, or at the time of the incident so that there can be hardly
any time to deliberate and fabricate a false story. The statements not accompanying the
incident are rejected and not allowed in evidence under S.6.
Illustrations of statements forming part of the transaction-
i)
A was tried for the murder of B by shooting him with a gun. The fact that the person,
who was at that time in the same room with B, saw a man with a gun in his hand pass
through a window opening into the room where B was shot, and thereupon exclaimed there
is a butcher (a name by which A was known) were held to be relevant.
ii)
A husband, his father, and his mother were prosecuted for the murder of his wife.
She cried out for help as soon as she was pushed into the room. Her children, who were
playing outside on the veranda, exclaimed at the same time that the accused were killing
their mother. This exclamation of children was received in evidence by the person who
heard them.
Illustrations of statements not forming part of the transaction: -
i)
One chotka was tried for the murder of one Bhutai by stabbing. The deceased Bhutai