The conduct of any party, or of any agent to any suit or proceeding, in reference to such suit or proceeding, or in reference to any fact in issue therein or relevant thereto, and the conduct of any person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto.
Explanation 1.-The word “conduct” in this section does not include statements, unless those statements accompany and explain acts other than statements; but this explanation is not to affect the relevancy of statements under any other section of this Act.
Explanation 2.-When the conduct of any person is relevant any statement made to him or in his presence and hearing, which affects such conduct, is relevant.
(a) A is tried for the murder of B. The facts that A murdered C, that B knew that A had murdered C and that B had tried to extort money from A by threatening to make his knowledge public, are relevant.
(b) A sues B upon a bond for the payment of money, B denies the making of bond. The fact that, at the time when the bond was alleged to be made, B required money for a particular purpose is relevant.
(c) A is tried for the murder of B by poison. The fact that before the death of B, A procured poison similar to that which was administered to B, is relevant.
(d) The question is, whether a certain document is the will of A.
The fact that, not long before the date of the alleged will. A made inquiry into matters to which the provisions of the alleged will relate, that he consulted Vakils in reference to making the will and that he caused drafts of other will to be prepared, of which he did not approve, are relevant.
(e) A is accused of a crime.
The facts that, either before, or at the time of, or after the alleged crime, A provided evidence which would tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance favourable to himself, or that he destroyed or concealed evidence, or prevented the presence or procured the absence of persons who might have been witnesses, or summoned persons to give false evidence respecting it, are relevant.
(f) The question is, whether A robbed B. The fact s that, after B was robbed, C said in A’s presence –“the police are coming to look for the man who robbed B”, and that immediately afterwards A ran away, are relevant.
(g) The question is, whether A owes B rupees 10,000.
The facts that A asked C to lend him money, and that D said to C in A’s presence and hearing –“I advise you not to trust A, for he owes B 10,000 rupees”, and that A went away without making any answer, are relevant facts.
(h) The question is, whether A committed a crime. The fact that, A absconded after receiving a letter warning him that inquiry was being made for the criminal, and the contents of the letter, are relevant.
(I) A is accused of a crime.
The facts that, after the commission of the alleged crime, he absconded, or was in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or attempted to conceal things which were or might have been used in committing it, are relevant.
(j) The question is, whether A was ravished. The fact that, shortly after the alleged rape, she made a complaint relating to the crime, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant.
The fact that, without making a complaint, she said that she had been ravished is not relevant, as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant under Section 32(1) or Section 157.
(k) The question is, whether A was robbed. The fact that, soon after the alleged robbery, he made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which complaint was made, are relevant.
The fact that he said he had been robbed without making any complaint, is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant under Section 32(1) or Section 157.
Under Section 8, conduct of parties are relevant and not the statement. But Explanation to Section * recognise two exceptions when statements may be admitted e.g. Illustration (I), (k), (g) and (f).
Motive.-According to Section 8 facts which show a motive for any facts in issue are relevant facts. According, to Richardson in ‘The law of Evidence’ (page 119), “motive is the moving power which impels one to do an act. It is the inducement for doing the act”. Evidence of motive power which impels one to do act. It is the inducement for doing the act”. Evidence of motive is always relevant, for men do not act wholly without motive. Evidence of motive helps the court to connect the accused with the deed. The act in question must have been done by the men who had the motive to do it. However, in the case of Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar, AIR 1994 SC 2420 it was held that absence of evidence of motive does not have the effect of destroying the value of other clear evidence. This is because sometimes only the doer knows the circumstances prompted him to the crime. Proof of motive for the commission of the offence is not necessary when there is a clear evidence that a person has committed an offence.
Preparation.-Section 8 further provides that acts of preparation are relevant. Preparation by itself is no crime. The act of purchasing a pistol for the purpose of shooting down a man is by itself is no offence. But once an offence has been committed, the evidence of preparation becomes most important for the crime must have been committed by the man who was preparing for it.