OFFENCESCentral

Section 7 of The Tokyo Convention Act, 1975

Provisions as to evidence in connection with aircraft.

(1)Where in any proceedings before a court in India for an offence or other act committed on board an aircraft the testimony of any person is required and the court is satisfied that the person in question cannot be found in India, there shall be admissible in evidence before that court any deposition relating to the subject matter of those proceedings previously made on oath by that person outside India which was so made--
1. (a)in the presence of the person charged with the offence; and
2. (b)before a judge or a magistrate of a country such as is mentioned in the First Schedule to the Citizenship Act, 1955 (57 of 1955) or before a consular officer of the Central Government.
(2)Any such deposition shall be authenticated by the signature of the judge, magistrate or consular officer before whom it was made and he shall certify that the person charged with the offence was present at the taking of the deposition.
(3)It shall not be necessary in any proceedings to prove the signature or official character of the person appearing so to have authenticated any such deposition or to have given such a certificate, and such a certificate shall, unless the contrary is proved, be sufficient evidence in any proceedings that the person charged with the offence was present at the making of the deposition.
(4)If a complaint is made to such a consular officer as aforesaid that any offence has been committed on an Indian registered aircraft while in flight elsewhere than in or over India, that officer may enquire into the case upon oath.
(5)In this section--
1. (a)the expression "deposition" includes an affidavit, affirmation or statement made upon oath; and
2. (b)the expression "oath" includes an affirmation or declaration in the case of persons allowed by law to affirm or declare instead of swearing, and noting contained in this section shall prejudice the admission as evidence of any deposition which is admissible in evidence apart from this section.

Summary

If a witness is needed in an Indian court for an aircraft incident but cannot be found in India, their past written statement made under oath outside India can be used.
The written statement must have been made in the presence of the accused person.
The statement must be signed and certified by a judge, a magistrate of a country listed in the First Schedule to the Citizenship Act, 1955, or an Indian consular officer.
The court does not require proof of the signature or official rank of the person who certified the document.
An Indian consular officer can run an inquiry under oath if someone complains about a crime on an Indian registered aircraft flying outside India.
Sworn statements can include affidavits, affirmations, or statements on oath, and this section does not block other legal ways of using such statements.

Practical examples

1On June 15, 2026, John Doe was accused of assault on an aircraft. A witness, Sarah Smith, gave a sworn statement before an Indian consular officer in London with John present. By the trial date of November 10, 2026, Sarah had moved to Australia and could not be found in India. The Indian court allowed her sworn statement to be read as evidence.

2In October 2026, a passenger complained to Indian consular officer Arjun Mehta in Dubai about a theft on an Indian plane flying over Europe. Arjun conducted an official inquiry under oath, recording witness statements to send back to India.

FAQ

1. What counts as a deposition under this section?

It includes any written affidavit, affirmation, or statement made under oath.

2. Does the court have to prove the signature of the judge who certified the statement?

No, it is not necessary to prove the signature or the official character of the person who authenticated the statement.

3. Where must the magistrate be from for their certified statement to be used?

The magistrate must be from a country mentioned in the First Schedule to the Citizenship Act, 1955.

4. Can a statement be used if the accused person was not present when it was made?

No, the statement must have been made in the presence of the person charged with the offence.

Test yourself

1.Under Section 7, whose presence is required when a deposition is made outside India for it to be admissible?

2.Which Act's First Schedule determines the countries whose judges or magistrates can take these depositions?

3.Who can a complaint be made to regarding an offence on an Indian registered aircraft flying outside India?

4.What is the legal status of the certificate stating the accused was present, unless the contrary is proved?

5.What is included in the definition of "deposition" under Section 7?

6PreviousSection 6 Jurisdiction.8NextSection 8 Provisions as to documentary evidence.

←Section 6 Section 8→