Origins and structure
The Ordinance was adapted from the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, drafted by Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, so Indian commentary and decisions remain useful persuasive sources. It is arranged in three parts: relevancy of facts (sections 5 to 55), proof (sections 56 to 100), and production and effect of evidence (sections 101 to 167), which covers burden of proof, estoppel, witnesses and their examination.
The Ordinance is supplemented by the Evidence (Special Provisions) Act No. 14 of 1995 on audio-visual and computer evidence, and by the Electronic Transactions Act No. 19 of 2006 on electronic records and signatures. Special statutes, notably the Prevention of Terrorism Act, alter the ordinary rules on confessions.
Relevancy: what a court may hear
The basic rule in section 5 is that evidence may be given only of facts in issue and of facts declared relevant by the Ordinance. Sections 6 to 16 make relevant facts that form part of the same transaction, that are the occasion, cause or effect of a fact in issue, that show motive, preparation or conduct, and facts that explain or introduce relevant facts. Section 11 admits facts otherwise irrelevant if they make a fact in issue highly probable or improbable, a provision often invoked for alibi evidence.
Opinion is generally irrelevant, but section 45 admits the opinions of experts on foreign law, science, art, handwriting and fingerprints. Character evidence is tightly limited by sections 52 to 55, with the accused's bad character inadmissible unless they put their good character in issue.
Admissions and confessions
Sections 17 to 31 are the most heavily litigated in the Ordinance. An admission is a statement suggesting an inference about a fact in issue, and may be proved against the maker. A confession by an accused is subject to three protections: section 24 excludes a confession caused by inducement, threat or promise from a person in authority; section 25 provides that a confession to a police officer shall not be proved; and section 26 excludes a confession made in police custody unless made in the immediate presence of a magistrate.
Section 27 is the important exception: where a fact is discovered in consequence of information received from an accused in custody, so much of the information as relates distinctly to the fact discovered may be proved. The dividing line between a bare confession and section 27 information has generated a large body of case law. Section 30 allows a confession by one accused to be taken into consideration against a co-accused tried jointly, but only as supporting material.
Documents and proof
Section 59 requires facts, other than the contents of documents, to be proved by oral evidence. Documents are proved by primary evidence, the original, or by secondary evidence in the circumstances listed in section 65, such as loss of the original or its being in the hands of the opposing party. Sections 67 to 73 deal with proof of signatures and handwriting, including comparison by the court. Public documents and certified copies have their own rules, and sections 79 to 90 create presumptions about certified copies, Gazettes, official records and documents thirty years old.
Sections 91 and 92 exclude oral evidence that contradicts or varies the terms of a written contract, grant or disposition of property, subject to the provisos for fraud, mistake, conditions precedent and separate oral agreements. These sections are central to contract and land litigation.
Burden of proof and presumptions
Section 101 places the burden on the person who would fail if no evidence were given. Section 102 locates it on the party who asserts the affirmative, and section 103 on the party who wishes the court to believe a particular fact. In criminal cases the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but section 105 places on the accused the burden of proving that the case falls within a general exception or proviso, on a balance of probability.
Section 114 lets a court presume facts that are likely to have happened in the ordinary course of events, including that a person in possession of recently stolen goods is the thief or receiver, and that evidence which could be and is not produced would be unfavourable to the party withholding it. Sections 111A onwards contain specific presumptions, and sections 115 to 117 set out estoppel.
Witnesses and their examination
Every person is competent to testify unless prevented by age, illness or infirmity from understanding the questions (section 118). The Ordinance protects certain communications: section 122 for communications between spouses, section 126 for communications with an attorney-at-law, and section 129 for confidential communications with legal advisers. A witness is examined in chief, cross-examined and re-examined (section 138). Leading questions are not allowed in chief without permission (section 142) but may be asked in cross-examination. Section 154 allows a party to cross-examine its own witness with leave, section 155 covers impeaching credit, and section 159 governs refreshing memory from a contemporaneous record.
Electronic and audio-visual evidence
The Evidence (Special Provisions) Act No. 14 of 1995 makes contemporaneous recordings and computer-generated statements admissible on proof of the reliability of the device or system, with notice to the opposing party. The Electronic Transactions Act No. 19 of 2006 gives legal recognition to electronic records and signatures and provides that they shall not be denied admissibility solely because they are electronic. Courts still require a proper foundation, so a witness who can speak to how the data was created and kept is essential.
Researching evidence questions with Lex
Evidence points are usually decided by applying a section to a close factual situation, so the leading judgments matter as much as the text. Ask Lex a question such as "when is a section 27 statement admissible" or "who bears the burden of proving an exception" and open the section and the authorities together. See also the criminal procedure guide and the civil procedure guide.
Questions and answers
What is the Evidence Ordinance of Sri Lanka?
The Evidence Ordinance No. 14 of 1895 is the statute that governs the law of evidence in Sri Lankan courts, in both civil and criminal cases. It sets out which facts are relevant, how facts and documents are proved, who bears the burden of proof, what presumptions apply and how witnesses are examined. It was adapted from the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.
Is a confession to the police admissible in Sri Lanka?
No, as a general rule. Section 25 of the Evidence Ordinance provides that a confession made to a police officer shall not be proved against the accused, and section 26 excludes confessions made in police custody unless made in the immediate presence of a magistrate. Section 27 allows proof of so much of a statement as leads to the discovery of a fact. The Prevention of Terrorism Act creates an exception for confessions to senior police officers.
Who has the burden of proof under the Evidence Ordinance?
Under sections 101 to 103, the burden lies on the party who would fail if no evidence were given and on the party asserting the affirmative. In criminal cases the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but section 105 places on the accused the burden of proving that the case falls within a general exception, on a balance of probability.
Is electronic evidence admissible in Sri Lanka?
Yes. The Evidence (Special Provisions) Act No. 14 of 1995 makes audio-visual recordings and computer-generated evidence admissible on proof of the reliability of the system and with notice to the other party, and the Electronic Transactions Act No. 19 of 2006 recognises electronic records and signatures. A proper foundation still has to be laid through a witness.
This guide is general information, not legal advice. Last updated 6 October 2026.