June 23, 2024
Home » Meaning of Admission in Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 17 to Section 23 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Spread the love

This article has been written by Sanju Jha (pursuing Ba. Llb from Rnb Global University, Bikaner.)

Meaning

Acknowledgement of the existence or truth of a particular fact by making a statement. Section 17 to 23 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with provision of Admission.

According to section 17 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, an admission is a statement oral or documentary or contained in electronic form which suggests an inference to any fact in issue or relevant fact, which is made by any of the persons and under the circumstances, herein after mentioned. Admission plays a pivotal role in judicial proceedings because if one party to a suit or any other proceedings proves that the other party has admitted his case, the wok of the court becomes easier.

Howdy, you all! Welcome to your page of knowledge. You will find different legal blogs, the latest news, current affairs, and many more on this channel. This is the initiative to develop the knowledge of the law in the world, especially for you.

Section 17 – Defined

  1. Satement – 1. Oral
    2. documentary
    3.electronic form
  2. Suggest on inference as to – 1. Fact in issue
    2. relevant fact
  3. Made by a person under the circumstances under section 18 to 20.

TYPES OF ADMISSION

FORMAL ADMISSION

Formal admission are judicial admission, and in such a case there is no need to prove the fact admitted. For example- Statement given by a party to a case in front of the Magistrate during the proceedings falls under the category of Formal or Judicial admission

INFORMAL ADMISSION

Informal admission are usually made in casual conversation in ignorance of the possibility of it being used in future litigation.  For example – with friend , family neighbour and so on.

BY CONDUCT

Those which are made by conduct of a  person. For example – if a person during informal interrogation by police run away from that place this conduct of the person is said to the admission by conduct.

Evidentiary Value Of Admission

An admission is the best evidence against the party making the same unless it is untrue and made under the circumstances, which does not make it binding on him. Admission by a party is substantive evidence of the facts admitted by him. Admissions duly proved are admissible evidence irrespective of whether the party making the admission appeared in the Witness box or not. In fact, Admission is best substantive evidence that an opposite party can rely upon it. The evidentiary value of admission only by government is merely relevant and not conclusive, unless the Party to whom they are made has acted upon and thus altered his detriment.

RAKESH WADHWAR V. J.I CORPORATION

The SC held that admission are not conculsive proof of the matter admitted unless they operate as estopples. Therfore the value of evidence depends on the circumstances under which they are made and also by whom it is made.

Who can make admissions (Section 18 to Section 20) –

An Admission is relevant if it is made by:

  • A party to the proceeding;
  • An agent authorized by such party.
  • A party suing or being sued in a representative character making admission while holding such character.
  • A person who has a proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest.
  • A person from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest. (Section 18)
  • A person whose position it is necessary to prove in a suit, if such statements would be relevant in a suit brought by against himself (Section 19.)
  • A person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in Dispute (Section 20.)

Proof of admission against persons making them, and by or on their behalf (Section 21)

 Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; but they can not be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by his representative in interest, except in the following cases.

  1. An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead it would be relevant as between the third person under section 32.
  2. An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it consists of a statement of the existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in issue, made at or about the time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct rendering its falsehood improbable.
  3. An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it if it is relevant otherwise than as an admission.

When oral admission as to contents of documents are relevant (Section 22)

Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant unless and until the party proposing them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question.

When oral admissions as to contents of electronic records are relevant Section 22A)

When oral admissions as to contents of electronic records are relevant.—Oral admissions as to the contents of electronic records are not relevant, unless the genuineness of the electronic record produced is in question. [Inserted by the Information Technology Act, 2000, w.e.f. 17-10-2000.]

Effects of Admission

Section 31 says that admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as Estoppel under the provision of this Act. The provision is further supplemented by Section 58 under which it is provided, “Facts admitted need not to be proved.” It says that no facts need to be proved in any proceeding which the parties hereto or their agent agreed to admit at the hearing or which, before the hearing,  they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading enforce at the time they are deem to have admitted by their pleading.

 Section 58 provides for the effect of water are known at judicial admissions. Judicial admissions are formal admissions made by a party during the proceeding of the case.  Judicial admissions are binding on the party that makes them. They constitute a waiver of proof. Admissions dealt with in the Indian Evidence Act in Section 17 to 23 and 31 or different from Judicial Admissions. Admission in the Evidence Act is nothing but a piece of evidence.

Nature of Admission:

The statements made by parties during judicial proceeding are ‘self regarding statements’. The self regarding statements may be classified under two heads –

  • Self-serving statements; and
  • Self-harming statements.

i) Self-serving Statements

Self-serving statements are those, which serve, promote or advance the interest of the person making it. Hence they are not allowed to be proved. They enable to create evidence for themselves.

ii) Self-harming

Self-harming statements are those which harm or prejudice or injure the interest of the person making it.  These self-harming statements all technically known as “Admissions” and are allowed to be proved.

AMBICA CHARAN KUNDU AND ORS. V. KUMUD MOHUN CHAUDHURY AND ORS.

In this case, a general rule of Section 11 is controlled by Section 32, “when evidence consists of a statement of persons who are dead and further tests the relevance of such a statement under Section 11. Though it is not relevant and admissible under Section 32, it is admissible or relevant under Section 11. It states that it is admissible even if it is altogether immaterial, but it is highly material that it was said whether it was true or false.”

CONCLUSION

 Therefore, evidence is big and vital in each civil and crook court case. It’s by far the most quintessential and critical detail of any complaint. The evidence should continually be admissible in court docket if the statistics are relevant and reliable. The proof shall fulfill all of the precise provisions below the code. Each logical and criminal relevance must be taken into consideration at some point of admission. Hence, the courts have to permit only the facts that have a high degree of probative value that might assist the courts.

LegalOnus

Aequitas Sequitur Legem


Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *