of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of
things under which they happened, or which afforded an
opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.
Emphasis applied
41. The Supreme Court in A.N. Venkatesh and Anr. v.
State of Karnataka reported in (2005) 7 SCC 714 in dealing
with the proposition namely, the conduct of an accused being
admissible as evidence under Sec. 8 of the Evidence Act, provided
that the conduct influences a fact in issue. Paragraph 9 thereof is
setout below:-
“9. By virtue of Section 8 of the Evidence Act, the conduct of the
accused person is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced
by any fact in issue or relevant fact. The evidence of the circumstance,
simpliciter, that the accused pointed out to the police officer, the place
where the dead body of the kidnapped boy was found and on their
pointing out the body was exhumed, would be admissible as conduct
under Section 8 irrespective of the fact whether the statement made by
the accused contemporaneously with or antecedent to such conduct
falls within the purview of Section 27 or not as held by this Court in
Prakash Chand v. State (Delhi Admn.) [(1979) 3 SCC 90 : 1979 SCC
(Cri) 656 : AIR 1979 SC 400] . Even if we hold that the disclosure
statement made by the accused-appellants (Exts. P-15 and P-16) is not
admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, still it is relevant
under Section 8. The evidence of the investigating officer and PWs 1, 2,
7 and PW 4 the spot mahazar witness that the accused had taken
them to the spot and pointed out the place where the dead body was
buried, is an admissible piece of evidence under Section 8 as the
conduct of the accused. Presence of A-1 and A-2 at a place where
ransom demand was to be fulfilled and their action of fleeing on
spotting the police party is a relevant circumstance and are admissible
under Section 8 of the Evidence Act.”
