Indian Evidence Act, 1872 And Bharatiya Sakshya Act 2023: Comparative Chart PART A: HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL Context: The Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 (BSB) stands as a monumental shift, replacing the time-honored Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA). With a nod to technological advancements and evolving legal needs, the BSB upholds several established principles while ushering in crucial modifications. Key Features: 1. Admissible Evidence:    – The BSB maintains the bedrock of admissible evidence, distinguishing between ‘facts in issue’ and ‘relevant facts.’ These encompass any fact pivotal to legal proceedings.    – A significant retention from the IEA is the categorization of evidence into two forms: documentary and oral. 2. Police Confessions:    – The BSB aligns with the IEA in deeming confessions made to a police officer as inadmissible. However, it introduces nuances, allowing information obtained during custody to be admissible if it distinctly relates to a discovered fact. 3. Documentary Evidence:    – Under the BSB, the definition of a document expands to include electronic records, offering a contemporary touch. This encompasses primary evidence like the original document and secondary evidence proving its contents. 4. Oral Evidence:    – A noteworthy departure from the IEA, the BSB introduces the possibility of providing oral evidence electronically. This paves the way for witnesses, accused individuals, and victims to testify through electronic means. 5. Admissibility of Electronic Records:    – The BSB makes a groundbreaking shift by classifying electronic records as primary evidence, diverging from the IEA’s characterization as secondary evidence. It broadens the scope to include information stored in semiconductor memory and communication devices like smartphones and laptops. 6. Secondary Evidence:    – Innovating on the IEA framework, the BSB expands secondary evidence to include oral and written admissions. It introduces the provision that secondary evidence may be necessitated not only when the original is inaccessible but also when the genuineness of the document is in question. 7. Joint Trials:    – Introducing clarity, the BSB explicates joint trials concerning accused individuals. It highlights that a trial of multiple persons, particularly in cases of absconding or non-response to arrest warrants, will be treated as a joint trial. Key Issues and Analysis: 1. Tampering of Electronic Records:    – Despite the BSB’s recognition of the admissibility of electronic records, concerns linger about the absence of safeguards against tampering and contamination during investigations. 2. Authentication Contradiction:    – The BSB introduces a contradiction by retaining provisions requiring the authentication of electronic evidence while simultaneously classifying it as documents that might not need certification. 3. Coercion in Custody:    – The BSB preserves the provision allowing information obtained in police custody to be admissible. However, concerns arise about potential coercion and the lack of sufficient safeguards, echoing observations from legal bodies. 4. Unaddressed Law Commission Recommendations:    – The BSB falls short of incorporating several recommendations from the Law Commission, including presumptions related to injuries caused in police custody. Conclusion: As the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 strides into the legal landscape, it brings a blend of continuity and evolution. While upholding fundamental tenets from the Indian Evidence Act, it ventures into uncharted territories, acknowledging the digital era and its impact on legal proceedings. As discussions unfold, the nuanced interplay between tradition and innovation will shape the future of evidentiary practices in India. Section in New Act Title (and Chapter) in the Bill Relevant section in IEA (*) PART I,Chapter I Preliminary Section 1 Short title, application, commencement S. 1 Section 2 Definitions: (1) S. 31 (a)”Court” S.3 (a) (b)”conclusive proof” S. 42 (c) (c)”document” S. 3 (e)* (d)”disproved” S. 3 (h) (e)”evidence” S. 3 (f)* (f)”fact” S. 3 (b) (g)”facts in issue” S. 3 (d) (i)”may presume” S. 4 (a) (j)”not proved” S. 3 (i) (k)”proved” S. 3 (g) (l)”relevant” S. 3 (c) (m)”shall presume” S. 4 (b) (2) Words and expressions used herein S. 3 (k)* PART II,Chapter II Relevancy of facts Section 3 Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts S. 5 Closely connected facts Section 4 Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction S. 6* Section 5 Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts S. 7 Section 6 Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct S. 8* Section 7 Facts necessary to explain or introduce fact in issue or relevant facts S. 9 Section 8 Things said, done by conspirator in reference to common design S. 10 Section 9 When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant S. 11 Section 10 Facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages S. 12 Section 11 Facts relevant when right or custom is in question S. 13 Section 12 Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily feeling S. 14 Section 13 Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional S. 15 Section 14 Existence of course of business when relevant S. 16 Admissions Section 15 Admission defined S. 17 Section 16 Admission by party to proceeding or his agent S. 18 Section 17 Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit S. 19 Section 18 Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit S. 20 Section 19 Proof of admissions against persons making them,and by or on their behalf S. 21 Section 20 When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant S. 22 Section 21 Admissions in civil cases when relevant S. 23 Section 22 Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding S. 24*,S. 28* – S. 29 Section 23 Confession to police officer S. 25 – S. 27 Section 24 Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence S. 30* Section 25 Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop S. 31 Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses Section 26 Cases in which statement of facts in issue or relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant S.