Doctrine of Res Gestae: Important Points

• Res gestae of any case properly consists of portion of that actual word's happenings out of which the right or liability, complained or asserted in the proceeding, necessarily arises.
• The term has been used in two senses. In the restricted sense it means world's happenings out of which the right or liability in question arises. In the wider sense it covers all the probative facts by which the res gestae are reproduced to the tribunal where the direct evidence of witness or perception by the court are unattainable.
• Res gestae literally means ‘things done’ or liberally speaking, the facts of the transaction, explanatory of an act or showing a motive for acting.
• Res gestae may be defined as “matter incidental to the main fact and explanatory of it, including acts and words which are so closely connected with each other so as to set up a part of the transaction and without knowledge of which the main fact, are synchronous with it and serve to depict its character."
• Res Gestae is an exception to hearsay rule.
• Hearsay evidence means the statement of a person who has not seen the happening of the transaction, but has heard of it from others.
• The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible in proof of a fact which has been stated by a third person. This rule has been long established as a fundamental principle in rule of evidence. But the principle of res gestae constitutes an exception to the rule of hearsay.
• The Doctrine of Res Gestae is a Latin word that literally means ‘things done’.
• It accounts for a spontaneous declaration made by a person promptly after an event and before the human mind has an opportunity to conjure a false story.
• A statement made under Res Gestae is made at the spur of the moment, i.e., during the commission of the crime or right after the commission of the crime. This leaves very less room for doubts and ambiguities.
• The doctrine of Res Gestae is a declaration that is in close connection with the commission of the event that leaves nearly no room for misunderstanding and misinterpretation.
• Section 6 of the Act solely deals with the application of res gestae. 
• Section 6 emphasises on relevance of facts forming part of the same transaction and reads as “Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place of at different times and places”.
• Circumstantial facts are declared relevant and admitted in evidence, though they are not in issue if they are so connected with the fact-in-issue, as to form part of the same transaction, whether they occur at the same time and place, or at different time and places. Such facts are admitted as forming part of res gestae, i.e., being part of the original proof of what has taken place.
• Doctrine of Res Gestae includes the elements that fall outside the modern hearsay definition, it includes circumstantial evidence of the state of mind, verbal parts of acts, and certain non-verbal conduct.
• If any statement under Section 6 is not admissible, it may be admissible in accordance with Section 157 as corroborative evidence.
• The strength of Section 6 is its vagueness. There is no distinction in this section between the word transaction used. It varies from case to case. Every criminal case on its own merit should be judged.
• The evidence is admissible under Section 6 if it is proven to be part of the same transaction, but whether it is reliable or not depends on the discretion of the judge.