Introduction
Motive, preparation, and conduct play a role in criminal trials, especially when courts rely on circumstantial evidence. Indian evidence law treats these factors as relevant facts because they help judges understand why and how an offence may have been committed. Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 laid down this principle for more than a century. With the introduction of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the legislature retained this rule almost unchanged. The corresponding provision is now Section 6 of the BSA, effective from 1 July 2024. The continuity shows that the lawmakers intended reform in language, not in substance.
How Did Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act Operate?
Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act recognised motive, preparation, and conduct as relevant facts. It allowed courts to consider any fact that showed a motive or preparation for a fact in issue. It also made the conduct of parties, victims, or their agents relevant if that conduct influenced or was influenced by the facts in issue. Courts consistently used this provision to assess intention and mental state, particularly in cases where direct evidence was unavailable. The section never made motive compulsory for conviction. Instead, it strengthened the prosecution story when proved alongside other circumstances.
What Is the Corresponding Provision under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Section 6 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 replaces Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act. The provision carries forward the same legal principles with minor drafting changes. The BSA divides the provision into clearer sub-sections. One part deals with motive and preparation, while the other deals with conduct. The new law updates terminology by replacing outdated expressions with modern and gender-neutral language. Despite these changes, courts apply Section 6 of the BSA using the same judicial interpretation developed under Section 8 of the IEA.
Why Is Motive Treated as Relevant but Not Essential?
Motive explains the reason or impulse behind a crime. Under both Section 8 of the IEA and Section 6 of the BSA, motive remains a relevant fact. However, the law does not require the prosecution to prove motive in every case. Courts have repeatedly held that failure to prove motive does not automatically result in acquittal. When direct evidence exists, motive becomes less important. In circumstantial cases, however, proof of motive provides a vital link in the chain of evidence and makes the prosecution version more probable.
How Does Preparation Help in Proving Guilt?
Preparation refers to acts done before the commission of an offence to arrange the means for committing it. Examples include procuring weapons, arranging poison, or planning logistics. Both the old and new laws treat preparation as relevant because it reflects planning and intention. Courts use evidence of preparation to infer mens rea, especially when combined with subsequent conduct. Section 6 of the BSA preserves this approach and continues to allow such evidence to be admitted without expanding or restricting its scope.
What Is the Legal Meaning of Conduct in Evidence Law?
Conduct includes the behaviour of the accused, the victim, or any relevant party before or after the incident. This may include acts such as absconding, hiding evidence, making false statements, or displaying unusual behaviour. Under Section 8 of the IEA, conduct was admissible if it influenced or was influenced by the facts in issue. Section 6 of the BSA restates the same rule with clearer structure. Courts continue to rely on conduct to draw inferences about guilt, innocence, or credibility.
Has the BSA Changed the Judicial Application of This Rule?
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam does not alter the substantive law on motive, preparation, and conduct. Judicial precedents decided under Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act remain relevant and binding in interpreting Section 6 of the BSA. The legislature intentionally avoided disrupting settled principles. As a result, lawyers and judges can safely rely on earlier case law while applying the new statute. The transition ensures legal certainty and smooth adaptation to the new evidence regime.
Why Are These Provisions Important in Circumstantial Evidence Cases?
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, courts must establish a complete chain of circumstances that points only to the guilt of the accused. Motive explains why the crime may have occurred. Preparation shows planning. Conduct before and after the offence reflects intention and consciousness of guilt. Together, these factors help courts reach conclusions beyond reasonable doubt. Both Section 8 of the IEA and Section 6 of the BSA empower courts to consider these elements holistically without treating any single factor as conclusive.
Conclusion
Section 6 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam represents continuity rather than change. It modernises language and structure while preserving the core evidentiary principles developed under the Indian Evidence Act. Motive, preparation, and conduct remain relevant facts, not mandatory requirements. Their evidentiary value continues to depend on the facts of each case. The new law ensures clarity, inclusivity, and consistency while maintaining the strength of established legal doctrine.
