KES’ Shri Jayantilal H.

Patel Law College

Name - Milind Suresh Mane

Topic – Admissions
Subject – Indian Evidence Act

Roll No: 27

TY LLB
Semester: VI

(Academic Year 2021-2022)

SR. NO TOPIC PAGE NO

1 INTRODUCTION 1

2 SUBJECT MATTER 2

3 CASE LAWS 12

4 CONCLUSION 13

5 BIBLIOGRAPHY 14

INDEX
INTRODUCTION

As per the law, evidence helps in establishing the guilt or innocence of a person. Section 3 of
the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 defines the “Evidence.” The definition states that any statements
through which the court sanctions or requires to be presented before it by witnesses, concerning
matters of fact under inquiry, such statements or documents are oral evidence. Whereas any
documents including any electronic evidence which the court permits or requires, concerning
matters of fact under inquiry, such documents are documentary evidence. There is no exact
distinction between admissibility and receivability under this Code. Evidence may be described
as inadmissible irrelevant evidence or an immaterial fact as evidence.

According to Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, admission is defined as any statement
made by any of the persons, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact,
and under certain circumstances. Admissibility simply means the power to approach. Admission
can be oral or documentary or contained in electronic form. Thus, the admissibility of evidence
means any evidence or document used in the court of law to prove or disprove alleged matters of
fact. “Admissions” are considered primary evidence and they are admissible to prove even the
contents of written documents, without notice to produce, or accounting for the absence of, the
originals.

1|Page
SUBJECT MATTER

Admission (Sec.17)

Section 17, Admission defined: An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in

electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which
is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.

Section 17 defines the term “admission.” According to the definition an admission: (i) is a
statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, (ii) which suggests any inference
as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and (iii) which is made by any person under the
circumstances hereinafter mentioned. Such circumstances as “hereinafter mentioned” have been
mentioned in Sections 18 to 30.

The admission has been dealt with in Sections 17 to 23 and 31, whereas Sections 24 to 30 are
also admission, but it is used as confession. Under the English law the term ‘admission’ is used
in civil cases, whereas ‘confession’ is used in criminal cases. But, the Indian Evidence Act has
not made such types of distinction. A confession is a statement made by an accused admitting his
guilt. Thus, a confession is also an admission made by a person charged with crime stating or
suggesting the inference that he committed a crime.

In CBI v V .C. Shukla the Supreme Court has pointed out the difference between an admission
and a confession. “Only voluntary and direct acknowledgement of guilt is a confession, but, if it
falls short of actual admission of guilt, it may be used as evidence against the person who made
it or his authorized agent, as an admission under section 21.” Admissions so made may not be
taken as conclusive proof of matter admitted but are to be accepted as substantive evidence of
fact admitted.

2|Page
Principle of Admissions:

The principle underlying the law of admission is that when a man makes statements, he makes
always in his favour except cases laid down in Section 21. By admission a person admits his
liability, because the statement of admission suggests an inference of liability. Stating the
reasons, the Madras High Courts expresses that “if a party’s admission falls short of the totality
of the requisite evidence needed for legal proof of a fact in issue, such an admission would be
only a truncated admission.” An admission therefore, binds its maker and not relates to a
question of law. Admissions are usually telling against the maker unless reasonably explained.
Admission is the best piece of evidence against the person making it. However, it is open to the
person making admission to show why admission is not to be acted upon.

Secondly, an admission is substantive evidence of the fact admitted whether the maker approves
it or not. The relevancy of admission depends on the statement made by the party even though it
may go against the maker. “Whatever a party says in evidence against himself…...What a party
admits to be true may be presumed to be so.”

One basic principle is that the admission of facts is a proof against the party making it; but the
admission on the point of law is not binding on the maker. An admission on a point of law is not
admission of a ‘thing’ so as to make the matter of estoppels. And again, the admission of law by
a counsel is not binding on a court and the court is not precluded from deciding the rights of the
parties on a true view of the law.

As stated earlier the principles of admission have been stated in Sections 17 to 20 subject to
fulfilment of requirement of Section 21. It is law of substantive evidence propris vigore. An
admission is the best evidence and though not conclusive, shifts the onus on to the maker.
Weight to be attached to an admission made by a party is a matter different from its use as
admissible evidence.

3|Page
Admissions are not conclusive proof of fact admitted. There must be unequivocal admission on
which a court can base its decision or that the correctness and reliability of such an admission
can be judged from other materials on record coupled with such admission. Where admission
was found to be involuntary and in the nature of explanation and no warning was given required
under section 164(2), Cr. P.C. the admission was held not admissible against the maker or the co-
accused.

If a person voluntarily admits any matter in issue before judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding and
such an admission is not retracted before being acted upon by the other side, it operates as an
estoppel against the person making it; such an admission by person unless explained furnishes
the best evidence. Vague statement in plaint, absence of signing on some blank papers and
misuse of papers for concocting sale deed cannot be taken as an admission of execution of sale
deed.

Defendant was seeking declaration as only legally married wife of the deceased. Clear admission
by defendant was that the plaintiff was also legally married wife of the deceased, but no evidence
was led by defendant to establish plea of divorce between plaintiff and deceased. Under these
circumstances the first appellate court accepted admission of the defendant as substantive
evidence in support of marriage between plaintiff and deceased.

Admissibility of Admissions

The admission is relevant on the following reasons.

1. “Admissions as waiver of proof:

An admission of a party is a statement of fact which dispenses or waives with the necessity of
proving the fact against him. It operates as a waiver of proof. “Admissions are admitted because

4|Page
the conduct of a party to a proceeding, in respect of the matter in dispute, whether by acts, speak
or writing, which is clearly inconsistent with the truth of his contention, is a fact relevant to the
issue. An admission, therefore as an admission is not conclusive against the person making it, but
it may operate as an estoppel under section 115 of the Evidence Act. Under the proviso to
Section 58 the court may ask some other independent evidence to support the admitted facts. The
court is not bound to give judgment in accordance with admission.”

2. “Admissions as statement against interest:

It is natural for a man to make statement in his favour. An admission, being a statement against
the interest of the maker should be supposed to be true, for it is highly improbable that a person
will voluntarily make false statement against his own interest.”

3. “Admissions as evidence of contradictory statements:

Where there is contraction between the statements of the party and his case, the contradiction
is relevant. For example, A sues B upon a loan. The account book shows that the loan was
given to C. The statement in his Account Book contradicts his case against B.”

4. “Admissions as evidence of truth:

The statements made by the party about the facts of the case, whether they may go in his
favour or against his interest, should be relevant as representation or reflecting the truth as
against him. Whatever a party says in evidence against himself may be presumed to be so.”

Forms of Admissions:

There as two types of admissions viz.,

(1) Judicial, and

(2) Extra-judicial Admissions.

5|Page
 1. Judicial Admission:

The judicial or formal admission is addressed to the court and is the part of the proceeding. It
is made on the record in the file of the court. The judicial admission may be made by the party
in his pleading, or by stipulation, or by statement in open court. Admission in pleadings or
judicial admissions by themselves can be made the foundation of the rights of the parties.

A judicial admission has not been dealt with by the Evidence Act, they are subject matters of
the Civil Procedure Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure. The procedures have been laid
down in civil suits in Order 12, Rule 2; Order 8, Rules 3,4 and 5; Order 10, Rule 1; Order 11,
Rule 8; Order 12, Rule 4 and Order 14, Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code. In Code of
Criminal Procedure there are provisions, viz. Sections 143, 251(5), 255(2), 263(g) and 271.

Although the judicial admission has not been dealt with under the Act the Supreme Court has
given due weight age. In Bishwanath Prasad v Dwarka Prasad the court opined that
“admissions, if true and clear, are by far the best proof of the fact admitted.” Admissions as
defined in Sections 17 and 20 and fulfilling requirements of Section 21 are substantive
evidence, propio vigare.

2. Extra-judicial Admissions:

The extra-judicial or informal admission is statement of fact made by the party previously in
course of life or business which is inconsistent with the facts to be established at the trial. The
extrajudicial admissions are called evidential admissions. The Evidence Act only deals with
this sort of admission in Sections 17 to 23.

Admission by conduct:

Admissions by conduct are not included in this section. It has been dealt with under section 8 of
this Act. But in some circumstances the conduct, active or passive, becomes evidence for an
admission. For example, a woman went to the school for registration of her child, but she did
not enter the name of the father and his profession. On asking she kept silence. Her silence may

6|Page
mean that she does not know the name of the father or she is not interested to disclose it.
Whatever view is taken it may be an admission for illegitimacy of the child.

Silence as admission:

Silence may amount to admission as if there is no reply or denial. A party may admit the truth of
the matter.

Example:

In Bessela v Stern the girl said to the boy “you always promised to marry me and you did not
keep your words.” The boy did not deny the allegation, but he offered her some money. The
boy’s silence as to promise was held to be admission.

Evidentiary value of an admission:

According to Section 17 an admission is a statement, oral or documentary, which suggests any

inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact and which is made to any person, and under
circumstances mentioned in Sections 18 to 31. Even though an admission plays a very important
part in judicial proceedings, it is only prima facie of proof.

The Supreme Court observed that admissions are very weak kind of evidence and the court may
reject them if it is not satisfied from other circumstances that they are untrue. It is to be noted
that admissions are not conclusive proof of matters admitted unless they operate as estoppels.
The value of admission depends upon the circumstances in which it made and to whom it is
made.

If one party to a suit or proceeding proves that the other party has admitted his case then the
work of the court becomes easier. But, in certain cases an admission is used in discrediting the

7|Page
parties’ statement by showing that he has on other occasions made statements inconsistent with
the cases afterwards set up. In such cases the truth of admission is not relied upon. Section
153(3) deals with such use of admissions. The evidentiary value of admission depends upon
circumstances under which they are made.

An erroneous admission on a point of law is not an admission of a thing so as to make the

admission a matter of estoppel and the court is not precluded from deciding the rights of the
parties on a true view of the law.

SECTION 18- WHO CAN MAKE AN ADMISSION

Section 18 of the Indian Evidence Act lays down the rules regarding as to who can make an
admission. According to this section, there are five classes of persons whose statements will be
considered as an admission in a suit. These five classes are:-

I. BY PARTIES TO PROCEEDINGS: The statements made by the parties to a proceeding

as against himself is considered as a relevant admission. Under this Section, the term
‘parties’ not only means the persons who appear on the record in that capacity but also
includes those persons who are parties to a suit without appearing. Persons who have an
interest in the subject matter of the suit but are not parties on the record are also considered
as parties in the proceedings and their statements have the same relevancy as the parties on
record. Similarly, a person who although appears as a party on the record but has no real
interest in the subject matter will not have any effect through his admission as against the
person he is appearing on behalf of.

II. ADMISSION BY THE AGENT: The statements made by an agent in a suit would be
admissible as against the person he is representing. The statements made by an agent are,
however, binding only when they are made during the continuance of his agency. So, when
the agent’s right to interference has come to an end any statement made by him after that
will not have any effect on the principal.

8|Page
III. STATEMENTS MADE IN REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER: When a person such
as trustees, administers, executors etc., sue or are sued in a representative character, any
statement made by them will only be admissible if made in their representative character.
Any declarations made by them in their personal capacity will not be taken as an
admission.

IV. PERSONS INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT-MATTER: In any such suit where

several persons are interested jointly in the subject-matter of the suit, then any admission
made by anyone of the parties will be taken as an admission against himself as well as the
other parties jointly interested in the subject matter. It does not matter whether the persons
jointly interested in the subject-matter are suing or being sued jointly or separately.
However, for this rule to apply there has to be prima facie foundation showing that joint
interest exists between the parties suing or being sued.

V. PERSONS FROM WHOM THE PARTIES DERIVE INTEREST: Any statement

made by the predecessor-in-title from who the party to the suit derives his title will be
admissible. But this will only be held as an admission if the predecessor-in-title made the
declaration while still holding the title and not after the title has been transferred. The
statement made by the former owner will not be considered as an admission as against the
parties if it was made title has been passed.

SECTION 19- ADMISSION BY PERSONS WHOSE POSITION MUST BE PROVED AS

AGAINST PARTY TO SUIT
As general rule statements made by a third party to a suit are not considered as admissions but
Section 19 is an exception to this rule. Section 19 refers to the statements made by a third party
as against himself when it affects his position or liability and when such liability or position is
relevant to be proved as against the party to the suit. The statements made by the third party, in

9|Page
 this case, would only be relevant if the liability or position of that third party still exists at the
time of the suit.

SECTION 20- ADMISSIONS BY PERSONS EXPRESSLY REFERRED TO BY PARTY

TO SUIT
This section refers to when a party to the suit refers to a third party regarding some information a
matter of dispute. Under Section 20 any statement made by such party will be taken as an
admission against the person who referred to the third party. This Section is another exception to
the general rule that statements made by strangers are not considered as an admission.

SECTION 21- PROOF OF ADMISSION AGAINST PERSONS MAKING THEM AND

BY OR ON THEIR BEHALF
According to Section 21, Admission may be used against the party making the admission but it
cannot be used by the party who makes the Admission for his own use. This Section further lays
down three exceptions to this rule. These exceptions are:-

I. ADMISSION FALLING UNDER SECTION 32: An Admission can be used by the

person for his own use if the person making such Admission is dead. In this case, such
admission will be relevant as between the third person under Section 32. Section 32 lays
down that statements made by persons dead or who cannot be found may be proved if it
was made under the circumstances mentioned in the Section.
II. STATE OF BODY AND MIND: An Admission made by a person regarding the existence
of the state of body or mind relevant can be used by the person making such Admission if
such a state of body or mind existed.
III. STATEMENT RELEVANT OTHERWISE THAN AS ADMISSION: An Admission
made by a person may be used by the person making it if it is proved that the statement is
relevant otherwise than as Admission.

SECTION 22- ORAL ADMISSIONS AS TO THE CONTENTS OF DOCUMENTS

10 | P a g e
According to Section 22, when there is a document then nobody can be allowed to prove the
content of that document. However, there are some exceptions to this rule:-
a. In the case the party is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of the documents
then he can rely on oral Admission.

b. In the case where the original document is lost or if it is in the possession of the opposition
party, then also the party may make oral Admission.

SECTION 22-A- ORAL ADMISSION AS TO THE CONTENTS OF ELECTRONIC

RECORDS
According to Section 22-A, when there is an electronic record then nobody can rely on the oral
Admission unless there is a question to the genuineness of such record.
SECTION 23- ADMISSION IN CIVIL CASES
Section 23 is only applicable to civil cases and do not extend to criminal cases. According to this
Section, an Admission in a civil case will not be relevant if it is declared that upon the express
condition made by the parties to the suit that the Admission should not be given or under some
circumstances the court infers that the parties have made an agreement that Admissions will not
be given. Section 21 lays down that when an Admission is given without prejudice then such
Admission will not be considered as relevant.

11 | P a g e
CASE LAWS
 In Basant Singh v. Janki Singh, the High Court mentioned some principles regarding
admissions:

 Any kind of statement in the plaint is admissible in evidence.

 No obligation on the Court to accept all the statements as correct and the court may accept
some of the statements as relevant and reject the rest.

 There is no distinction between an admission made by a party in a pleading and other

admissions.

 An admission made by a party in a plaint signed and verified by him may be used as
evidence against him in other suits.

 Admissions are always examined as a whole, hence they cannot be divided into parts.

 Any admission cannot be regarded as conclusive and it is open to both parties to show
whether it’s true or not.

 Admissibility of a plea of guilt can be determined only if the plea is recorded by the
accused in his own words.

12 | P a g e
  An admission to have a substantive evidence effect should be voluntary in nature.

 Admissions do not carry a conclusive value, it is only limited to being prima facie proof.

 Admissions that are clear in the words of the accused are considered as good evidence of
the facts submitted.

 In Bishwanath Prasad v. Dwarka Prasad, the court said “Admissibility is substantive

evidence of the fact which is admitted when any previous statement made by the party used
to contradict a witness does not become substantive evidence. The Admissibility of evidence
serves the purpose of throwing doubt on the veracity of the witness.”

CONCLUSION

13 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 https://www.lkouniv.ac.in/site
 https://old.amu.ac.in/emp/studym
 https://blog.ipleaders.in/relevancy-admissibility-admissions
 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal

14 | P a g e