IEA 133→BSA 138

IEA 133 to BSA 138: Accomplice

Section 133 IEA (1872) replaced by Section 138 BSA (2023)

View IEA Section 133 →View BSA Section 138 →

IEA 133 to BSA 138 at a Glance

Section 133 IEA (Accomplice) is now Section 138 BSA, in force from 1 July 2024. What changed is set out below.

What Changed From IEA 133 to BSA 138?

Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 138 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024. The accomplice rule was reworded. The IEA said a conviction is "not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony" of an accomplice. The BSA says it is "not illegal if it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony" of an accomplice. Section 119 keeps the illustration that an accomplice "is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars".

IEA 133 vs BSA 138: Comparison Table

AspectIEA 1872 (repealed)BSA 2023 (in force)
Section133138
HeadingAccompliceSame

IEA 133 and BSA 138: Bare Act Text Side by Side

IEA 1872 (repealed)

Section 133, IEA 1872

133. Accomplice.—An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
BSA 2023 (in force)

Section 138, BSA 2023

138. Accomplice.—An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal if it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony of an accomplice.

When It Applies: IEA 133 vs BSA 138

Under IEA 133
  1. Applies when an accomplice gives evidence in court as a witness against an accused person.
  2. Applies when a conviction against the accused person rests on uncorroborated evidence given by an accomplice.
Under BSA 138
  1. Applies when an accomplice gives evidence in court as a witness against an accused person.
  2. Applies when a conviction against the accused person rests on corroborated testimony given by an accomplice.

What IEA 133 to BSA 138 Means in Practice

Section 133 IEA became Section 138 BSA on 1 July 2024, and the accomplice rule was reworded. Under Section 133 IEA, a conviction was not unlawful solely because the conviction rested on uncorroborated testimony from an accomplice, whereas Section 138 BSA states that a conviction is not unlawful if the conviction rests on corroborated testimony from an accomplice. The printed words of Section 138 BSA do not repeat the statement that a conviction on uncorroborated testimony is not illegal. The Adhiniyam also keeps the illustration that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless corroborated in material particulars.

FAQs: IEA 133 to BSA 138

Did Section 138 BSA change the wording on corroboration of an accomplice from Section 133 IEA?▼

Yes. Section 133 IEA used the words merely because and uncorroborated, while Section 138 BSA replaced them with if and corroborated. The Adhiniyam also keeps the illustration that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless corroborated in material particulars.

Does an accomplice remain a competent witness against an accused person under Section 138 BSA?▼

Yes. Both Section 133 IEA and Section 138 BSA state that an accomplice is a competent witness to testify against an accused person.

Disclaimer: This comparison is for informational purposes only. The new criminal laws came into effect on 1 July 2024. Consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.

Sources: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 ·