Affidavit
Also called: Sworn statement
A written statement of facts made on oath or affirmation before an authorised person. Under Section 3(3) of the General Clauses Act it includes an affirmation or declaration by persons allowed to affirm.
Explained
Section 3(3) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 provides that affidavit shall include affirmation and declaration in the case of persons by law allowed to affirm or declare instead of swearing. The person making it is the deponent. Section 1(2) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 states that the Adhiniyam does not apply to affidavits presented to any Court or officer, so an affidavit is not ordinarily evidence unless a law or an order of the court permits facts to be proved by it.
In civil cases, Order XIX Rule 1 of the CPC allows the court, for sufficient reason, to order that a fact be proved by affidavit, but not where a party bona fide wants a witness produced for cross-examination and he can be produced. Rule 2 allows evidence on affidavit upon any application, but the court may, at the instance of either party, order the deponent to attend for cross-examination. Rule 3 confines affidavits to facts within the deponent's own knowledge, except on interlocutory applications, where statements of belief may be admitted if their grounds are stated. Order XVIII Rule 4 requires the examination-in-chief of a witness to be on affidavit, and Section 139 names those who may administer the oath, including a notary.
In criminal proceedings, Sections 331 to 333 of the BNSS allow affidavits about the conduct of public servants and evidence of a formal character, and list the persons before whom affidavits may be sworn: a Judge or Magistrate, a Commissioner of Oaths or a notary. A false statement in an affidavit can amount to giving false evidence under Section 227 of the BNS.
Courts have attached consequences to affidavits. In Mohinder Singh Gill (1977), Krishna Iyer J. observed that a statutory order must be judged by the reasons stated in it and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in an affidavit. In Rajnesh v. Neha (2020), the Court made an Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities mandatory in all maintenance proceedings.
What the law says
Section 3, General Clauses Act
(3) “affidavit” shall include affirmation and declaration in the case of persons by law allowed to affirm or declare instead of swearing;
Clause (3) defines affidavit to include affirmation and declaration
Any Court may at any time for sufficient reason order that any particular fact or facts may be proved by affidavit, or that the affidavit of any witness may be read at the hearing, on such conditions as the Court thinks reasonable:
Provided that where it appears to the Court that either party bona fide desires the production of a witness for cross-examination, and that such witness can be produced, an order shall not be made authorising the evidence of such witness to be given by affidavit.
Court may order facts to be proved by affidavit
(1) Affidavits shall be confined to such facts as the deponent is able of his own knowledge to prove, except on interlocutory applications, on which statements of his belief may be admitted: provided that the grounds thereof are stated.
(2) The costs of every affidavit which shall unnecessarily set forth matters of hearsay or argumentative matter, or copies of or extracts from documents, shall (unless the Court otherwise directs) be paid by the party filing the same.
State Amendment
Affidavits confined to facts within the deponent's knowledge
[(1) In every case, the examination-in-chief of a witness shall be on affidavit and copies thereof shall be supplied to the opposite party by the party who calls him for evidence:
Provided that where documents are filed and the parties rely upon the documents, the proof and admissibility of such documents which are filed along with affidavit shall be subject to the orders of the Court.
[(1A) The affidavits of evidence of all witnesses whose evidence is proposed to be led by a party shall be filed simultaneously by that party at the time directed in the first Case Management Hearing.
Examination-in-chief of a witness to be on affidavit
(1) Affidavits to be used before any Court under this Sanhita may be sworn or affirmed before—
(a) any Judge or Judicial or Executive Magistrate; or
(b) any Commissioner of Oaths appointed by a High Court or Court of Session; or
Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn in criminal cases
Earlier law: CRPC 297. Authorities before whom affidavits may be sworn.
(2) It applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, but not to affidavits presented to any Court or officer, nor to proceedings before an arbitrator.
(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.
Adhiniyam does not apply to affidavits presented to a Court or officer
Earlier law: IEA 1. Short title. Extent. Commencement of Act.
Example
For example, in an application for a temporary injunction, the plaintiff may state in his affidavit that he believes the defendant is about to sell the property, if he states the grounds of that belief; at the trial itself, his affidavit must be confined to facts he knows.
For the exam
- Includes affirmation and declaration: Section 3(3), General Clauses Act, 1897.
- BSA does not apply to affidavits (Section 1(2)); they are evidence only where law or the court allows.
- Order XIX Rule 3 CPC: own knowledge only, except belief with grounds on interlocutory applications.
- Examination-in-chief in civil suits is on affidavit (Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC).
- Rajnesh v. Neha (2020): disclosure affidavit of assets and liabilities in all maintenance cases.
362 questions in the Law Maker question bank use this term. Practise Civil Procedure Code questions
Judgments
- Rajnesh v. Neha (2020)Affirming interim maintenance to the wife and son, the Court issued country-wide directions under Article 142 on overlapping maintenance claims, a mandatory Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities, criteria for quantum, maintenance from the date of application, and enforcement.
- Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1977)The Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the Election Commission's cancellation of a poll and order for a fresh poll was barred by Article 329(b), leaving every relief to be sought in an election petition.
Related terms
- EvidenceUnder Section 2(1)(e) of the BSA, statements of witnesses before the Court, including those given electronically (oral evidence), and documents, including digital records, produced for its inspection (documentary evidence).
- PleadingUnder Order VI Rule 1 of the CPC, pleading means a plaint or a written statement.
- DocumentAny matter expressed, described or recorded on any substance by letters, figures, marks or other means, intended or usable to record or prove that matter, and including electronic and digital records.
- MaintenanceProvision for food, clothing, residence, education and medical attendance, and for an unmarried daughter her marriage expenses (Section 3(b) HAMA). Claimable under personal law and under Section 144 BNSS.
- Judicial proceedingUnder Section 2(1)(m) of the BNSS, any proceeding in the course of which evidence is or may be legally taken on oath.
Further reading
Checked 12 November 2026. Statutory text is quoted from the Bare Acts library, taken from India Code. See the full glossary.