Every Act of Parliament opens with the three questions the Section 1 provisions of statutes routinely answer: what the Act is called, where it applies, and when it comes into force. Section 1 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) provides the answers for the new law of Indian evidence — with one deliberate departure from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) that quietly matters: the BSA drops the IEA's express territorial-extent clause, leaving general principles of statutory interpretation to answer the reach question.
1. Short title, application and commencement.
(1) This Act may be called the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
(2) It applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, but not to affidavits presented to any Court or officer, nor to proceedings before an arbitrator.
(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.
The three sub-sections and what each does
The change: territorial extent dropped
Section 1 corresponds to Section 1 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA). The BPRD BSA-to-IEA correspondence table records the substantive change specifically: the IEA provided that it "extended to the whole of India", whereas the BSA excludes this provision of territorial extent. The BSA does not contain an express clause defining its geographical reach, and correspondingly Section 2 of the BSA drops the definition of "India" that Section 3 IEA had contained.
| Feature | Section 1, IEA | Section 1, BSA |
|---|---|---|
| Short title | Indian Evidence Act, 1872 | Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 |
| Territorial extent | "Extends to the whole of India" | No express extent clause |
| Application | All judicial proceedings; not affidavits; not arbitration | Identical — including express mention of Courts-martial |
| Commencement | Fixed by the IEA itself | Notified by the Central Government |
What "all judicial proceedings" and the two exclusions mean
Sub-section (2)'s application clause is doing careful work. The BSA applies to all "judicial proceedings" in or before any Court — including Courts-martial (military tribunals under the Army Act, Air Force Act, and Navy Act frameworks). Two categories are expressly excluded:
- Affidavits. An affidavit is a sworn statement filed in a proceeding, not a proceeding itself. Rules governing affidavits are found in procedural statutes and specific-court practice directions rather than in the BSA.
- Arbitration proceedings. Domestic and international arbitrations are governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and are conducted under rules of evidence chosen by the parties or applied by the tribunal — the BSA does not apply to them, though arbitral tribunals often draw on it as a reference point.
Sub-section (3): the executive-notification commencement
Sub-section (3) leaves the commencement date to the Central Government's notification in the Official Gazette. This is standard modern legislative technique — it allows the transition from the IEA to the BSA to be phased, and it permits the notification to specify different dates for different provisions if that is thought fit. The parallel enactments of the BSA, BNSS, and BNS are all governed by similar commencement-by-notification clauses, letting the government coordinate their simultaneous coming-into-force.
The significance of dropping the territorial-extent clause
The IEA's express extension to "the whole of India" was, historically, a piece of colonial statutory drafting that carried defined significance in the pre-Constitution era. In the post-Constitution period, the reach of a Union statute is governed by general constitutional principles — the legislative competence under the entries in the Concurrent or Union Lists, and the territorial application under Article 245 of the Constitution. The BSA's decision to drop the express extent clause reflects a modernising choice: general constitutional principles will determine the Act's territorial reach, and no specific statutory clause is needed to say so.
In practical terms, the absence of an express extent clause does not restrict the BSA's application. The Act applies wherever the Union Parliament's legislative competence over evidence extends — which is the whole of India, subject only to the specific applications made in Union Territories and to any special provisions that particular States or Union Territories may attract under other constitutional mechanisms.
Continuity of substantive doctrine
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Does the BSA apply to civil suits? | Yes — all civil suits before any Court fall within sub-section (2). |
| Does it apply to criminal trials? | Yes — all criminal proceedings before any Court fall within sub-section (2), working alongside the BNSS and BNS. |
| Does it apply to tribunals? | It applies to tribunals when they are exercising judicial functions and are Courts within the meaning of Section 2(1)(a) — the position varies with the tribunal's constitution. |
| Does it apply to arbitrations? | No — expressly excluded by sub-section (2). |
| Does it apply to Courts-martial? | Yes — expressly included in sub-section (2). |
Transitional considerations
Because Section 1(3) leaves commencement to executive notification, an important practical question in the transition from the IEA to the BSA is which regime applies to proceedings already underway on the appointed date. General principles of statutory interpretation typically distinguish between substantive changes (which do not apply retrospectively unless the statute so provides) and procedural or evidentiary changes (which apply prospectively to ongoing proceedings unless a saving is expressly provided). The BSA has largely preserved the IEA's substantive doctrine; where it has changed the rules — the electronic-evidence expansion in Sections 61 to 63, the coercion addition in Section 22, the new Explanation II to Section 24, and the like — the transition question can matter in individual cases. Practitioners handling proceedings that straddle the commencement date should be alert to arguments about which regime applies to specific evidentiary questions.
Key Takeaways
- Three sub-sections: short title, application (with express Courts-martial inclusion and affidavit/arbitration exclusion), and executive-notification commencement.
- Substantive change: the IEA's territorial-extent clause has been dropped; the "India" definition is correspondingly removed from Section 2.
- Constitutional-principle reach: the Act's territorial application is now governed by general constitutional principles rather than a specific statutory clause.
- Executive commencement: the Central Government notifies the date in the Official Gazette — allowing phased transition alongside the BNS and BNSS.
- Continuity for practitioners: the practical reach of the Act — all judicial proceedings, all Courts including Courts-martial, excluding affidavits and arbitration — is identical to the IEA's.
Conclusion
Section 1 is the door through which every Act enters the statute book, and the BSA's Section 1 does its job with characteristic Indian legislative economy. Three sub-sections cover the name, the application, and the commencement — with one deliberate change from the IEA that dropped the express territorial-extent clause. That change reflects a modern legislative attitude: general constitutional principles govern reach, no need for a colonial-era territorial recital. In every other respect, Section 1 is functionally identical to its 1872 predecessor. With this article, the project's descending walk through the entire Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — 170 sections, from Section 170 at the tail of Chapter XII down to Section 1 at the head of Chapter I — is complete.