Relevance: Definition and Meaning

This is indication that virtual fact requires an authenticity to be true, rather than just assuming it to be so in the absence of support. Appropriate suggestion may be disregarded due to irrational partiality, complications, or time wastage. Proof that is pertinent is frequently acceptable, while proof that is irrelevant is not acceptable.

Vital Components of Relevance

It includes −

• The law alone does not determine relevance.

• Real experience, logic, mutual sense, social knowledge, and a fundamental understanding of current circumstances are used to determine relevance.

What is Relevant Proof?

Every aspect of reality that can support any practical assumption about the facts at issue or the core issue in contention is appropriate. According to Sir "Stephen," "relevance" denotes a relationship among an event's source and consequence. Generally talking, the authenticities vital to a subject are those that are crucial for auxiliary or disproving its actuality. These proofs could be proven legally or inferentially.

The term "relevancy of fact" actually refers to a fact that has a certain amount of probative strength. These are not inevitabilities in the matter; rather, these may affect the likelihood that the matter is real. The nature of relevant evidence is supplementary or collateral, but it is appropriate or probable to give rise to a conclusion about right or wrong based on a method of reasoning.

Only once a fact is connected to the facts at issue will it be considered relevant; otherwise, it is prohibited.

For example − Even though they are not acceptable, conversations between spouses while they are still married, professional conversations, and conversations about government issues are all pertinent. If there is a reasonable connection between a specific fact and the primary issue, logic, not the law, can be used to determine it. A fair connection among the facts is what is meant by relevancy. Essentially, it is a factual issue, and it is the responsibility of the attorney to resolve whether or not to present the evidence in court.

Knapp v. State − In this case, the legal criteria stated by the American court was that "the declaration of the purpose of a single entity of evidence puts on whether corroboration of that evidence would practical in general aid determine the critical issue at trial."

Relevant Facts (Section-9 of Evidence Act)

Under this Section, facts that support, contradict, illuminate, or present key truths are also crucial. For example, if someone flees the scene of an incident shortly after being accused of a crime, this might be considered a lead-up to and be impacted by the facts of the case.

Ramanathan v State of TN

The honorable supreme court ruled in this instance that it is critical to adhere to the accepted and customary process for classifying suspects in order to identify evidence from witnesses or the ill-fated victim when the identity of the offender is unclear.

Conclusion

Admissibility. The relevance and admissibility of evidence are distinguished in Section 136 of the Evidence Act; if it can be shown that the evidence would be relevant and if it were presented, the court will accept the evidence. Though all relevant evidence is not admissible, every admissible piece of evidence is relevant. The court cannot accept an irrelevant fact. Nevertheless, under certain circumstances, evidence that is irrelevant in terms of Sections 5 to 55 may still be accepted.

In cases decided over many years, the importance of the evidence is thought to be greater. The managing official has enormous discretion in determining whether or not a proof is admissible, and this discretion must be constrained by guidelines. The law requiring proof is outdated for the modern world and has to be altered for the legal system to function more effectively.

The intensity of the judge must be distinguished from the judge's own intensity; otherwise, the enormous power granted to individuals would only result in the defiling of intensity. The law is unparalleled, and no one should be given the freedom to interpret it however he pleases. Whether it is discovered by an illegal search or in another manner, all evidence related to the case must be admissible. There are many among us whose presence in the eyes of the law is permanent due to unreliable evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. What does relevance mean in law?

Ans. The meaning of ‘relevance’ in law can be studied in ‘evidence law’ and it refers the fact Relevant means, with regards to evidence, having some value or tendency to prove a matter of fact significant to the case.

Q2. What is the relevance of facts in law?

Ans. Both in criminal cases as well as in civil cases, facts play a crucial role. In any legal case, the relevant facts are the evidence presented to the court to establish what happened in a particular situation. Likewise, based on the relevant facts, the legal representatives of the parties argue the case and when these relevant facts are proved to the satisfaction to the court, respective judge gives the judgement.

Q3. What is primary evidence?

Ans. In relation to documents, primary evidence is frequently employed. The document itself serves as the main piece of evidence when discussing documents. The original document, that is. According to Section 86 of Nigeria's Evidence Act, the main evidence is a document that has been produced for the court's scrutiny.