- 25-Dec-2024
- Family Law Guides
When there is a question whether an act was accidental or intentional, or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant.
(a) A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which it is insured. The facts that A lived in several houses successively, each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance company, are relevant, as tending to show that the fires were not accidental.
(b) A is employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is A's duty to make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him. He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. The question is whether this false entry was accidental or intentional. The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in each case in favor of A, are relevant.
(c) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit currency. The question is whether the delivery of the currency was accidental. The facts that, soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered counterfeit currency to C, D, and E are relevant, as showing that the delivery to B was not accidental.
Section 13 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, addresses the relevance of facts when determining whether an act was accidental or intentional. It emphasizes that if an act is part of a series of similar occurrences involving the same person, those facts are significant in assessing the nature of the act.
A1: It pertains to determining whether an act was accidental or intentional based on the context of similar occurrences.
A2: If the act is part of a series of similar occurrences involving the same person, those facts are relevant to assess the nature of the act.
A3: Yes, previous similar acts can provide context that may indicate whether the current act was accidental or intentional.
1. Case of Arson: If A is accused of burning down his house for insurance, evidence of previous fires in other insured houses owned by A, followed by claims from different insurance companies, supports the argument that the act was intentional.
2. False Entry in Accounting: If A is accused of making a false entry in a financial record, the presence of other false entries that benefit A can suggest that the action was intentional rather than accidental.
3. Counterfeit Currency Delivery: If A delivered counterfeit currency to multiple parties around the same time, it suggests that the delivery to a specific individual was intentional, not accidental.
Section 13 establishes that when assessing the nature of an act, especially whether it was accidental or intentional, the context of similar past actions by the same individual is crucial. The existence of a pattern can strongly influence the interpretation of a particular incident.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA). Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
