BSA Section 27: When Evidence From a Former Proceeding Is Relevant in a Later One (Evidence Act 33 Mapping) (2026)

Explainer · Evidence Law · BSA

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Section 27 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), the new evidence law in force since 1 July 2024, lets evidence a witness gave in an earlier proceeding be used in a later one when the witness is unavailable. It replaced Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. If you are searching "Section 27" expecting the discovery rule, note that the discovery rule moved. This explainer sets out what Section 27 of the BSA really covers, its conditions, how it maps to the old law, where the discovery rule now sits, and what changed. Last verified October 2026.

01A number that changed meaning

Under the old Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 27 was the famous discovery rule: how much of the information received from an accused in police custody may be proved. Many notes still carry that mapping. Under the BSA, the numbering changed, and Section 27 now holds a different rule.

Section 27 of the BSA is about using evidence from a former judicial proceeding in a later one when the witness is unavailable. The discovery rule is now a proviso inside Section 23 of the BSA. Read by the date of the proceeding and by the correct new number.

02What Section 27 says

Section 27 of the BSA provides that evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before a person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for proving, in a later judicial proceeding or a later stage of the same one, the truth of the facts it states, when the witness is unavailable.

Because it is an exception to the rule of live testimony, the section is hedged with conditions, set out in its proviso.

03When the witness is unavailable

The section applies where the witness:

• is dead;
• cannot be found;
• is incapable of giving evidence;
• is kept out of the way by the adverse party; or
• cannot be produced without an amount of delay or expense which, in the circumstances, the court considers unreasonable.

Only when one of these situations is shown does the earlier evidence become usable to prove the truth of what the witness said.

04The conditions in the proviso

The proviso sets three conditions, and all must be met:

• the earlier proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest;
• the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; and
• the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first proceeding as in the second.

An explanation makes clear that a criminal trial or inquiry is treated as a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused. These conditions protect the right to cross-examine, which is why the exception is allowed only on a tight test.

05Old to new: Evidence Act 33 to BSA 27

Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, on the relevancy of evidence from a former proceeding, is now Section 27 of the BSA. The rule and its conditions are carried over.

The point to remember is that the old Section 27 (discovery) and the new Section 27 (former evidence) are different rules. Do not carry the old meaning into a BSA matter.

06Where the discovery rule went

The discovery rule, long known as Section 27 of the Evidence Act, allows proof of so much of the information received from an accused in police custody as relates distinctly to a fact discovered. Under the BSA this is kept as a proviso to Section 23(2), not as a standalone section.

So a reader searching for "Section 27 discovery" should look at the proviso to Section 23(2) of the BSA. The large body of case law on discovery continues to guide how that proviso is read. For the related rule that bars an involuntary confession, see Section 22 of the BSA.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

Whether earlier recorded evidence can be read into a later trial turns on the same parties, a real chance to cross-examine, and substantially the same issues, and these points are argued often. Claw holds over 30 crore judgments, reaching Supreme Court decisions from 1950 and High Court decisions from 1990, and answers a query in under 5 seconds. It tracks cases, orders and hearings across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, so you can pull how Section 27, or the old Section 33, has applied that test and follow a live matter by party or advocate name.

Claw does not use your case documents to train its AI models. Start a free Claw account to collect authorities on former evidence and keep track of a live trial, and open the case search across Indian courts hub for research beyond this section.

08Sources and further reading

• India Code (official text of the BSA, 2023): indiacode.nic.in
• PRS Legislative Research (BSA overview and comparison): prsindia.org
• Section 27, BSA (bare text): devgan.in
• Claw: clawlaw.in

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The law changes through amendments and judgments, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you act.

09Frequently asked questions