BSA Section 49 — Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply

Summary

In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused person has a bad character is irrelevant. This means the court should not consider their past bad conduct or reputation as evidence against them. However, this changes if evidence has been given that the accused has a good character. In that situation, the accused's bad character becomes relevant and can be brought up.

Explanation 1 states that this section does not apply to cases where the bad character of any person is itself a fact in issue. In other words, if the case is specifically about whether someone has a bad character, then this rule about irrelevance does not apply.

Explanation 2 states that a previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character. This means that if the accused has been convicted of a crime before, that conviction can be used to show they have a bad character, subject to the main rule in the section.

Official Text

In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused has a bad character, is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant.

Explanation 1.—This section does not apply to cases in which the bad character of any person is itself a fact in issue.

Explanation 2.—A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character.

Referred to by

• BSA §50 — Character as affecting damages

Related Judgments

• Sunanda Bhimrao Chaware & Ors. vs The High Court of Judicature at Bombay — Bombay High Court (Mumbai Principal Seat) (2012)
• NEW MANEK CHOWK SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS CO. LTD. AND ORS. vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF AHMEDABAD AND ORS — Supreme Court of India (1967)
• K. C. NINAN vs KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS — Supreme Court of India (2023)

Old <-> New Code Mapping

• IEA §54 — Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply