Section 167 IEA: No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 167 IEA at a Glance
Section 167 IEA deals with no new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence. From 1 July 2024 it is replaced by Section 169 BSA.
Section 167 IEA Bare Act Text
167. No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence
The improper admission or rejection of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new trial or reversal of any decision in any case, if it shall appear to the Court before which such objection is raised that, independently of the evidence objected to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the decision, or that, if the rejected evidence had been received, it ought not to have varied the decision.
Source: Section 167, Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 167 IEA in Simple Words
Section 167 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 stops a decision from being overturned merely for an evidence error. In any case, a party may object that a court wrongly admitted or wrongly rejected some evidence. That error alone is not a ground for ordering a new trial or reversing the decision.
When evidence was improperly admitted, the Court hearing the objection looks at the rest of the record. It leaves aside the admitted evidence that was objected to. If enough other evidence still existed to support the decision, the decision stands and no new trial is ordered.
When evidence was improperly rejected, the Court hearing the objection considers what that evidence would have done. It asks whether receiving the rejected evidence ought to have changed the outcome. If the rejected evidence ought not to have changed the decision, the rejection alone cannot overturn the decision.
When Section 167 IEA Applies
- An objection is raised before a Court about improper admission or improper rejection of evidence in any case.
- A party seeks a new trial or the reversal of a decision based on that objection.
- Where evidence was improperly admitted, the Court finds that the remaining evidence was sufficient to support the decision.
- Where evidence was improperly rejected, the Court finds that receiving it ought not to have changed the decision.
Example of Section 167 IEA
Section 167 IEA in the BSA
Section 167 IEA is now covered under Section 169 BSA.
Section 167 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 169 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024 without any change in wording.
View detailed comparison (IEA 167 vs BSA 169) →FAQs on Section 167 IEA
What is Section 167 IEA?▼
Section 167 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that improper admission or improper rejection of evidence is not by itself a ground for a new trial or reversal of a decision. If the remaining evidence justifies the decision, or if the rejected evidence ought not to have changed it, the decision stands.
Does improper admission of a document automatically lead to a new trial under Section 167 IEA?▼
No. Under Section 167 IEA, if the Court hearing the objection finds that there was enough other evidence to support the decision apart from the disputed evidence, a new trial is not granted on that ground alone.
Does Section 167 IEA apply when a court wrongly rejects a piece of evidence?▼
Yes. Under Section 167 IEA, if it appears to the Court hearing the objection that receiving the rejected evidence ought not to have changed the decision, the rejection alone is not a ground for reversal or a new trial.
What is Section 167 IEA in BSA?▼
Section 169 BSA is the corresponding provision in the BSA. Section 167 IEA became Section 169 BSA on 1 July 2024 without any change in wording.
Have questions about Section 167 IEA?
Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, or how it applies to your situation.
Ask NyayGuru →Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.
Sources: Bare Act Text, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ·