No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.” Critically examine this statement and state the facts of which the court must take judicial notice.

Question: No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.” Critically examine this statement and state the facts of which the court must take judicial notice. [M.P.C.J. 2013, Bihar J. 1979, U.K.C.J. 2015]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.” Critically examine this statement and state the facts of which the court must take judicial notice.]

Answer

All facts in issue and relevant facts must be proved by evidence, either oral or documentary.

To this rule, there are two exceptions: (a) facts judicially noticeable, and (b) facts admitted.

According to Section 56 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the facts of which the Court will take judicial notice need not be proved. In other words, any judicially noticeable fact does not require to be proven before the Court.

Section 56 lays down that when a fact, which is relevant in a case, is of such a nature that the court must take judicial notice of it, no evidence in proof of it should be given. The Supreme Court has held that the Court can take judicial notice of alternative sources. The Court can take judicial cognizance of the fact that a certain area is terrorist stricken.

The meaning of the section will, however, be apparent, if we consider together with this section the last words of section 57. In order to understand the correct meaning of sections 56 and 57, they should be taken together. Section 57 gives a list of facts of which the courts must take judicial notice.

Thus both the sections are taken together mean that when controversy arises with regard to the facts enumerated in section 57, the parties who assert their existence, need not produce any evidence to prove the existence of such fact. With regard to the facts enumerated in section 57, if their existence comes into question, the parties who assert their existence, or the contrary, need not in the first instance produce any evidence, in support of their assertions. They need only ask the judge who shall try to know about such facts and if the judge’s own knowledge will not help him, he can call upon the parties to assist him.

The Judge may resort to any source of information that he finds handy and which he thinks will help him. Thus he might consult any book, or obtain information from any person or bystander. But in making this investigation the judge is emancipated entirely from all the rules of evidence laid down for the investigation of facts in general. He may resort to any source of information that he finds handy and which he thinks will help him.

Judicial notice can be taken of a notification issued by the Government or any competent authority in the exercise of any delegated power of legislation. Judicial notice cannot, however, be taken of a notification issued by any authority in the exercise of its executive functions. No judicial notice can be taken of facts that are not mentioned in section 57.

For instance, in the case of Managing Committee of Rajo Sidheshwar High School v. State of Bihar, AIR 1996 Pat 19 it was held that the court can take judicial notice of the fact that the system of education in the State has virtually crumbled and serious allegations are made frequently about the manner in which the system is being worked.

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
2. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-II
3. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-III
4. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IV
5. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-V
6. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
7. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VII
8. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
9. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IX
10. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-X