Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter II: Of the Relevancy of Facts · Judgments of courts of justice when relevant
Section 42: Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 41
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
In plain words
Other judgments, orders or decrees are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the inquiry, but they are not conclusive proof of what they state.
Example: A sues B for trespass and B claims a public right of way. A decree in an earlier suit by A against C upholding the same right of way is relevant but not conclusive.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned in section 41 are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the enquiry; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state.
Illustration A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land, which A denies. The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the same land, in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 42
-
Bharat Sher Singh Kalsia v. State of Bihar & Anr.
Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the prayer for quashing of the FIR registered u/ss. 409, 467, 468, 471 and 420 IPC against the vendee for the criminal acts, misuse of power of attorney-PoA,…
- Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja
- V. Kalyanaswamy (D) by Lrs. & Anr. v. L. Bakthavatsalam (D) by Lrs. & Ors.
- Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju v. Securities and Exchange Board of India
- Guru Granth Saheb Sthan Meerghat Vanaras v. Ved Prakash and Ors.
- Vishnu Dutt Sharma v. Daya Sapra
- Syed Askari Hadi Ali Augustine Imam & Anr. v. State (Delhi Admn.) & Anr.
- Jitendra Panchal v. Intelligence Officer, Ncb & Anr.
- Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju v. Nimmaka Jaya Raju and Ors.
- K.G. Premshanker v. Inspector of Police and Anr.
- Commissioner_ of Income Tax, Kanpur v. Kamla Town Trust
- Virupakshayya Shankarayya v. Neelakanta Shivacharya Patiadadevaru