AMITY LAW SCHOOL, NOIDA

Evidence Law
Analyzing the Impact of Character Evidence in Legal Proceedings
A Comparative Study of its Admissibility and Influence on Judicial
Decision-Making Across Jurisdictions.

SUBMITTED TO : ` SUBMITTED BY :
Ms Rajasi Guharoy Aakarsh Chauhan
A032170123003
LLB (Hons.)

1
 Table of Contents

[Link]. Topic Page No.

1. Abstract 3

2. Introduction 4-5

3. Admissibility of Character Evidence in India 6

4. Composition of Character 7

5. The Role of Character Evidence in Indian Courts 8-9

6. The Use of Character Evidence to Prove a Fact in Issue 10 - 11

7. Character Evidence in Civil and Criminal Cases 12

8. Indian Evidence Act - Section 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 13 - 15

9. Purposes of Character Evidence 16

10. Case Laws 17 - 19

11. Conclusion 20

12. Bibliography 21

2
 ABSTRACT

‘Character’ means, the disposition, reputation, or collective traits of a person as they might be
gathered from close observation of that person’s pattern of behavior.1 The English Law has
been including the term ‘character’ as a part of the evidence for civil and criminal cases. It also
has a Criminal Justice Act, 2003 from which more versions and possibilities of ‘character’ as
evidence is defined and well channelized. However, to the contrary, Indian Law remains silent
when it comes to defining the term ‘character’, but in certain cases, do considers a person’s
character as evidence for those cases.

Character evidence plays a pivotal role in legal proceedings, influencing judicial decisions and
shaping outcomes. This comparative study delves into the admissibility and impact of character
evidence across various jurisdictions. By examining legal frameworks, precedents, and judicial
practices, this research aims to provide insights into how character evidence is treated and
utilized in different legal systems. Through comparative analysis, factors affecting its
admissibility and influence on judicial decision-making will be explored, shedding light on the
complexities and nuances surrounding this crucial aspect of the legal process. Ultimately, this
study seeks to enhance understanding and facilitate informed discussions on the role of
character evidence in diverse legal contexts.

This paper explores the significance of character evidence in Indian law and how it could affect
a case's outcome. This paper tries to analyze how character evidence can alter verdicts, affect
credibility assessment, and affect the overall fairness of trials by looking at the legal provisions
and relevant case law. To answer the fundamental question of what character is comprised of,
the paper examines the different elements that make up a person's character. It describes how
a person's character can include a wide range of characteristics, such as their personality,
actions, reputation, and moral principles. It becomes clear that character evidence can offer
important insights regarding a person's credibility and a tendency for particular behaviours
once the framework of character is understood. The paper emphasizes the need for an equal
approach when using character evidence while defending the rights of the accused and
upholding the fairness of the legal system.

3
 INTRODUCTION

In the decisions that we make about the conduct of others in our daily lives, character is perhaps
the most important single factor. Men act and react and go about their everyday business on
their expectations of what others will do. It is common sense when asked to judge a man's
conduct on a particular occasion to enquire how he behaved on other occasions. Character is
simply a compendious summary of a person's past actions, good and bad. The conclusion may
be expressed in terms of moral and mental qualities, but these are in turn determined only by
what a person says and does.

The law is principally concerned with the character of a person in the estimation of those who
know him, which is his reputation. In the early history of the law, character was the major
determinant of a person's fate at the hands of the law. The following is an account of the role
of character in an 11th century trial.

Since it raises the issue of whether someone should be entirely judged based on previous
behaviour or acts, the concept of character evidence has long been a topic of discussion in the
legal community. Character evidence admissibility varies by jurisdiction and is subject to
various laws and rules but mainly it is governed by the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.

Character evidence is typically prohibited from criminal trials because it could unduly
influence the jury's verdict or prejudice them against the accused. 1 Character evidence is,
however, permitted in specific situations, such as civil lawsuits2 where determining a person's
reliability may be important, or situations where the character of a witness or victim is in
question.

1
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 54
2
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 52
4
Character evidence is frequently utilized in situations involving sexual assault and harassment,
for example. Since it raises the issue of whether previous behaviour may be used to anticipate
future acts, the relevance of character evidence in these situations is frequently contested.
According to some, character evidence is crucial in determining a person's reliability and
reputation, but others advise against using it because it can result in unjust assessments and
stereotypes.

The Indian legal system places great importance on the principle of justice, aiming to ensure
fair trials and protect the rights of both the accused and the victim. In this pursuit of justice,
evidence plays a pivotal role in determining the outcome of a case. While the evidence is
traditionally associated with tangible and objective facts, the relevance of character as evidence
has gained recognition in recent years.

5
 ADMISSIBILITY OF CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN INDIA

As a rule, the accused’s character is irrelevant in civil cases. However, if it is shown that the
character of the accused is relevant and directly related to the course of events, then the court
may admit that evidence.3 In civil cases, the character of the plaintiff who ought to receive the
damages is relevant because it directly affects the compensation he demands from the
defendant.4

In criminal proceedings, as a rule, a previous bad character is not relevant with the only
exception of it being a reply to a statement showing good character.5 However, good character
is always relevant in criminal proceedings.6 When the character of a person is itself a fact in
issue, then these sections are not applied because the character itself proves or disproves a
particular action or course of action.

For example, in cases involving binding over procedures for maintaining good behaviour under
Sections 109 and 110 of the Criminal Procedure Code 7 and in cases involving dacoity offences
under Sections 400 and 401 of the Indian Penal Code.8 The fact in the issue would be the
person's bad character. To determine whether the act was intentional or unintentional, it is
permissible to present evidence that the accused had previously committed similar crimes.9
The presence of bad character evidence is acceptable if it is used to establish a significant fact
that cannot be established separately.

3
Ibid
4
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 55
5
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 54
6
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 53
7
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, s 109,110
8
Indian Penal Code 1860, S 400,401
9
Indian Penal Code 1860, S 15
6
 COMPOSITION OF CHARACTER

Indian Evidence Act10 describes that character is made up of two components –

1. Disposition – Disposition is often referred to as what a person is in a person’s reality.

A person’s inherent qualities which he had obtained through education, upbringing or
any material condition in life is called disposition. A badly reputed person may have a
good disposition.

2. Reputation – The evaluation of a person done by society is frequently used to describe

reputation. It relates to what other people believe about that person. It should be
highlighted that testimony from those who are not familiar with the defendant but are
aware of his reputation is not acceptable in court.

Difference between Disposition and Reputation –

Basis Disposition Reputation

Basic definition Inherent qualities of a person The general credit of the person
among the public

Perspective What the person is in reality What other people think about
the person
Relation A good disposition usually leads A good reputation doesn’t
to a good reputation imply a good disposition.

All these differences are drawn based on the explanation provided in section 55 of the Indian
Evidence Act of 1872.

Character refers to a person's overall standing in the eyes of others along with their personality
and conduct, since reputation and disposition are both inherent characteristics of a person. But
only those who are closest to someone can understand their disposition. Even if a person has a
very good reputation, their disposition may be poor.

10
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 55
7
 THE ROLE OF CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN INDIAN COURTS

ASSESSING CREDIBILITY

Credibility is the quality of a person's words and deeds being trustworthy and reliable.
Character evidence can be used in court proceedings to support or refute a witness's or party's
credibility. This type of evidence can consist of both a person's good and bad attributes.

A witness or party's reputation for being truthful, dependable, or law-abiding can be shown
through the introduction of positive character evidence. Their testimony may be more
convincing and more credible as a result of this evidence.

Negative character evidence, on the other hand, might be used to discredit a witness or party
by demonstrating a history of dishonesty, unreliability, or criminal activity.

ESTABLISHING PROPENSITY

Character evidence is important in determining a person's propensity to do something. A

person's propensity is their inherent tendency or inclination to act in a certain way. Character
evidence can be used in criminal proceedings to show that the defendant has a propensity to do
the alleged crime.

For instance, if someone is charged with theft, the prosecution may provide evidence to
demonstrate that the accused has a history of stealing or a reputation for falsehoods. Based on
their prior behaviour and character attributes, the evidence seeks to prove that the accused is
more likely to have committed the crime.

BALANCING PROBABILITIES

Character evidence also contributes to the balancing of probabilities in Indian courts when
determining a person's guilt or innocence. The overall likelihood of a person's involvement in
the accused offence is determined by the court after taking into account character evidence and
other evidence offered in the case.

8
Character evidence can be used to tip the scales in favour of one side or the other, but it is not
conclusive proof of guilt or innocence. In comparison to other evidence in the case, such as
witness testimony, forensic evidence, and circumstantial evidence, the court assesses the
weight and relevance of character evidence. The objective is to arrive at a fair and impartial
evaluation of the probability based on all of the available evidence.

ASSESSING DAMAGES

Character evidence may be used in civil lawsuits to evaluate the losses a party has incurred.
When establishing the extent of the loss inflicted and the appropriate amount of compensation
to be granted, the character of the person who was allegedly injured may be important.11

For instance, the plaintiff's character may be important in determining the damage done to their
reputation in a lawsuit for defamation. Character proof can be used to prove the plaintiff's
excellent standing in society before the allegedly defamatory words are made, increasing the
amount of damages granted.

It is significant to remember that the rules of evidence and the judge's discretion govern the
admissibility and weight of character evidence in Indian courts. Before admitting character
evidence and giving it proper consideration during the decision-making process, the court
carefully assesses its relevance, reliability, and potential for prejudice.

11
Indian Evidence Act, S 55
9
THE USE OF CHARACTER EVIDENCE TO PROVE A FACT IN ISSUE

The first is where it is tendered in proof or disproof of some other issue apart from character,
or to show the doing or not doing of an act by the person against whom the evidence is tendered.
The second is where, under the law and pleadings in the action it is one of the issues, or the
issue to be resolved.

For convenience the first kind of evidence may be referred to as secondary evidence of
character and the second primary evidence of character. In the introduction some illustrations
were given of the use of secondary character evidence. In respect to the use of character
evidence as secondary evidence to prove some other fact in issue the reaction against its use
resulted in its total prohibition subject to some limited exceptions.

The use of character evidence to prove a fact in issue involves presenting information about an
individual's character traits or tendencies as a means to infer their behavior, actions, or
intentions relevant to the case at hand. Character evidence can be introduced by either party in
a legal proceeding to support their arguments or challenge those of their opponent.

There are several ways in which character evidence can be utilized –

1. Motive and Intent : Character evidence can be used to establish motive or intent. For
example, evidence of a person's prior acts of violence may be introduced to demonstrate
a pattern of aggression, supporting the argument that they acted with malicious intent
in a current case involving assault.

2. Credibility of Witnesses : Character evidence can also be used to assess the credibility
of witnesses. For instance, evidence of a witness's reputation for truthfulness or
dishonesty may be presented to bolster or undermine their testimony. A witness with a
history of honesty may be viewed as more credible, while one with a reputation for
dishonesty may be viewed with skepticism.

10
 3. Propensity Evidence : In some cases, character evidence is used to suggest that a
person has a propensity or predisposition to act in a certain way. This can be particularly
relevant in criminal cases where evidence of prior misconduct is introduced to
demonstrate a defendant's propensity to commit the crime charged.

4. Impeachment : Character evidence can also be used to impeach the credibility of a

party or witness. For example, evidence of a person's prior convictions or unethical
behavior may be introduced to undermine their credibility and weaken their case.

However, the use of character evidence is subject to certain limitations and restrictions to
prevent unfair prejudice or bias. Courts typically apply rules of admissibility to ensure that
character evidence is relevant, reliable, and probative of the facts at issue. Additionally, judges
have discretion to exclude character evidence that is unduly prejudicial or likely to confuse the
issues in the case.

Overall, while character evidence can play a valuable role in legal proceedings by providing
insights into human behavior and motivations, its use must be carefully scrutinized to ensure
that it serves the interests of justice and fairness.

If the logical relevance of the evidence were the test of admissibility it would be difficult to
rationalize its exclusion in civil cases and its admission in criminal cases. In tort actions such
as assault, deceit and negligence evidence of good character on the part of the defendant would
appear to be as relevant as the evidence of good character of the accused in a criminal case.

It is submitted that, while the courts appear to exclude character evidence in civil cases on the
basis of irrelevance, the real rationale is the policy to restrain civil proceedings within
manageable limits and to prevent unfairness to civil litigants who cannot be expected, without
previous notice, to be prepared to protect themselves against imputations which may range
over their whole career.12

12
Edwards et al. v. The Ottawa River Navigation Company (1876),
39 U.C.Q.B. 264; 13 HaIsbury (2nd ed.) 572.
11
 CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES

In Civil Cases, to prove the probability of the party to the suit’s conduct ascribed to him is
deemed to be irrelevant.

For the same, there should be a clear demarcation drawn between the cases where,

1. If the Character of one of the parties to the suit forms the fact of issue or not?

2. If the case’s nature is either Civil or Criminal?

When the general character of one of the parties to the suit is put to the question, it will be duly
considered only when it forms the facts in issue.

If it does not, then the argument for analyzing the ‘Character’ as evidence is rejected and
declared to be invalid (in Civil Cases) under Section 52 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

There are two exceptions to this rule though. They are,

1. In Civil Proceedings evidence of Character as affecting damages is admissible,

2. In Criminal Proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a good character is
relevant but the fact that he/she has a bad character is irrelevant except in some cases
(Ss. 53 and 54).

The general exclusion of character evidence is based on the grounds of public policy and
fairness since its admission would prejudice and be against the people by completely exposing
not only their professional lives but also their personal lives which they could not possibly
come into court prepared to defend.

The business of the court is to try the case in hand and not judge the nature of the parties who
are present in the court and sometimes, even a terrible person can have a very righteous cause.

12
 INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT – SECTION 52 , 53 , 54 , 55

Character Evidence cannot always be relevant to decide on an issue. But cross-examining is

possible by counsels for the purpose of revealing truth by way of asking questions to reveal a
person’s character under Section 146(3) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 155
prescribes the manner of impeaching a witness’ credit. Section 52 prohibits the evidence of
character with regards to the subject matter of a suit. Therefore, Section 155 cannot be
construed as an exception to Section 52.

Section 52 excludes character evidence from being given only for the purpose of rendering
probable or improbable any conduct imputed to the party. However, when the facts which are
relevant otherwise that for the purpose of showing character are proved, and those facts raise
inferences concerning the character of a party to the suit, such facts become relevant not only
to prove the facts for which they are directly given as support for but also for the purpose of
showing the character of the party concerned. In such a case, it is open to the court to form its
own conclusion as to the character of the party and as to the effect of such character on the
conduct imputed to the party.

WHEN IS CHARACTER RELEVANT –

Section 53 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, talks about when the good character of an accused
is relevant. The principle upon which the good character may be proved is that it affords a
presumption against the commission of a crime.

This presumption arises from the improbability as a general rule as proved by the common
observation and experience that a man who has uniformly pursued an honest and upright course
of conduct will depart from it and do an act so inconsistent with [Link] a person may be
overcome by temptation and fall into crime.

In the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, following the Nirbhaya Case, inserted Section
53A in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, that states that the evidence of character or previous
sexual experience is not relevant in certain cases.

13
Section 54 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that, Previous bad character of a person is
not relevant, except when there is evidence of him having a good character which becomes
relevant to the case.

Under this section, the prosecution to a side may give evidence of the bad character of the
accused, it will be relevant. It can give evidence of bad character only when the accused claims
his good character through his submissions of evidence.

If the accused has already been guilty of certain criminal acts other than those of which covered
by the accusation, for the purpose of heading to the conclusion that the accused is a person
likely from his criminal conduct or character to have committed the crime for which he is being
tried.

RELEVANCY OF BAD CHARACTER AS EVIDENCE

The Courts may permit cases that give evidence of bad character only when the other party
provides evidence of his good character. But submission of evidence to prove bad character in
the first place is not permitted. This prohibition will not apply when the bad character of a
person itself forms the issue of that case.

The Supreme Court held that the evidence that discloses certain unpleasant information about
the accused is examined by the Court in order to determine the motive behind the murder and
not for proving the guilt.

Section 55 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, acts as an exception to the general rule laid down
in Section 52 of the same Act. The character of a party to a civil suit is relevant if it is of such
nature as to affect the degree of damage in which, the plaintiff ought to receive, according to
this Section. In cases like this, the damage is always an issue.

For example, in the case of adultery, it is easy to prove the bad character of the plaintiff. In a
divorce suit, the husband’s cruel character is more likely to be proved and is relevant. Like that,
in the case of breach of promise of marriage, the plaintiff’s character can be relevant of being
immoral. Thus, the plaintiff’s bad character in the case of adultery can be probably more proved
easily.

14
Section 55 lays down that –

- it is applicable only in a suit for damages.

- the character of the plaintiff only is relevant.
- such character of the plaintiff is relevant only as to affect the amount of damages to be
awarded to the plaintiff.

15
 PURPOSES OF CHARACTER EVIDENCE

"Character evidence" may be employed for two purposes. First, to impeach the witness's
credibility. This does not-directly touch upon the issues that are directly relevant to the case.

It serves only as a means of persuading the court that the evidence of the impeached witness is
unreliable in so far as it might bear upon the issue.13

Impeachment of this kind is governed by the provisions of the Evidence Act on cross-
examination14 and is therefore strictly speaking out of the scope of character evidence.

Second, "character evidence" may be employed for substantive purposes. Here, evidence of
character is used to prove "substantive facts, which are in issue."15 Sections 67-72 and section
160(1)(d) of the Evidence Act govern such use of character evidence.

Consequently, since the rules governing character evidence depend upon the particular purpose
for which it is being employed, a distinction should always be drawn between the substantive
and credibility purposes.

While easy to articulate in theory, this distinction occasionally becomes difficult for many
students, legal practitioners and judges to make in practice.

13
I. Younger, et al. Principles of Evidence. 2nd ed. 1991, p. 360.
14
See generally Sections 188(2), 189, 190, 193 & 197 Evidence Act.
15
2I. Younger, et. aI, op. cit. p. 360
16
 CASE LAWS

1. KM NANAVATI v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA16

This is a very famous case. It is usually discussed for explaining the 1st exception given
under section 300 of the Indian Penal Code.17 For this paper, only the evidence part is
being discussed here.

Brief Facts –
The petitioner K.M. Nanavati, an Indian Naval Officer, shifted to Bombay with his wife
Sylvia and their children. A businessman named Prem Bhagwan Ahuja was residing
with his sister in the same city.
Ahuja and his sister were introduced to Nanavatis through common acquaintances of
Ahujas and Nanavatis. As Nanavati was out of home most of the time because of work,
Sylvia and Prem were meeting frequently.
Later, Sylvia confessed to her husband about the Illicit relationship with Prem Ahuja.
In the heat of agony, Nanavati went to his ship to procure a loaded revolver and then
went to the office of Prem Ahuja.

Arguments –
In the arguments, the question of character was reckoned. The character of Nanavati
was described as good which was also evident by the fact that he was in such a reputed
post which demanded a good character itself.18 Although this statement is admissible
in court according to the Indian Evidence Act19 yet the facts of the case in hand cannot
be ignored completely. Additionally, when the petitioner brings up the fact that the
petitioner has a good character, the opposite party gets an option to highlight the bad
character.20

16
(1962) AIR 605
17
Indian Penal Code 1860, S 300
18
Ibid, accessed 20 May 2023
19
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 53
20
Indian Evidence Act 1872, S 54
17
 2. ABDUL SHAKUR AND OTHERS v. KOTWALESHWAR PRASAD AND
OTHERS21

The Allahabad High Court observed that there is, however, no question that there is no
finding (not due to any mistake on the part of the lower court, but rather because there
is no evidence to support such a finding) that there was any connection between the
alleged bad habits of the insolvent and the debts that are the basis of the creditors'
claims.22

The promissory notes were allegedly obtained from the insolvent while he was drunk,
but that was the only connection that could be established.23 Due to this, a civil case
would not be affected by the insolvent's general bad character.

3. HABEEB MOHAMMAD v. STATE OF HYDERABAD24

The Supreme Court of India observed that according to section 53 of the Evidence Act,
evidence related to an accused's character is always relevant in a criminal proceeding.
The evidence of his mental state is also relevant.25
In criminal cases, a man's character is frequently taken into consideration when
attempting to explain his actions and determine whether or not he is guilty.26

When we learn about the nature of the individual who did actions, many of their actions
would either seem suspicious or completely normal.27 An accused person is allowed to
demonstrate their general good character even when it comes to the topic of
punishment.

21
AIR (1958) All 54
22
Ibid, < [Link]
23
Ibid
24
(1954) AIR 51
25
Ibid, < [Link] >
26
Ibid
27
Ibid
18
 4. LAKSHMANDAS CHAGANLAL BHATIA v. THE STATE28

It was argued that because Section 5429 governs all other sections of the Evidence Act
and declares an accused person's character irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, any
evidence presented by the prosecution that might tend to reveal the accused's bad
conduct cannot be admitted at all.

The judge said that “Prima facie, Section 54 cannot be given overriding effect. What is
made inadmissible is the evidence of bad character. If such a strained meaning is given
to the language of Section 54, it would prevent very often relevant evidence from being
introduced and hamper the course of justice. True that the use of such evidence of prior
transactions which is given by the prosecution must be confined within its proper and
legitimate limits only. The Court cannot, merely because there was evidence of similar
actions on the part of the accused some time previous, infer that the offence under
inquiry must also necessarily have been committed by the accused.”

28
AIR (1968) Bom 400, < [Link]
29
Indian Evidence Act 1872
19
 CONCLUSION

In the Indian legal system, character evidence is extremely important even if it comes second
to direct proof. It is an essential tool for assessing the reliability of witnesses, figuring out the
accused's tendencies, and weighing the possibilities in a case. To protect the rights of the
accused, its use and admissibility must correspond to the principles of justice, necessity, and
due process.

Indian courts can work towards a more thorough understanding of the persons involved and
ultimately guarantee that justice is delivered by carefully evaluating character evidence. the
relevance of character evidence in legal proceedings must be carefully considered, taking into
account the various laws and regulations governing its admissibility, as well as the potential
impact it may have on the proceedings. Its use must be judicious and guided by the principles
of fairness and justice for all parties involved.

Hence, Character Evidence is a brittle piece of evidence that does not have a strong base even
in the Courts. While the entire concept of understanding a person’s character based on his
reputation in the society and his past activities is not as substantial as other primary evidence,
there is a hiccup in adding character evidence under the lines of primary evidence.

But the role Character Evidence plays in saving some cases like divorce, defamation, etc.,
cannot be denied as well. But there needs to be an aggregate opinion that should form the final
verdict on this.

Hence, given the paucity of cases requiring Character Evidence in the first place, or the
character of a person forming the issue of a case, the Court should not use Character Evidence
as a crux, but as a compass that has high possibilities of being faulty.

Therefore, given the condition of Indian Law, it is not necessary to have specific legislations
for Character Evidence, but it is good if there are any laws that clear up all the vagueness in
Character Evidence that the present laws contain.

20
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1- [Link]
%20is%20evidence%20on,Supreme%20Court%20in%20Michelson%20v.
2- [Link]
3- [Link]
4- [Link]
5- [Link]
[Link]
6- [Link]
samhitha-p-vasishtan/

21