Section 17 of Evidence Act, 1872 defines an admission as a statement, oral or documentary, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact.
Section 18 of Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the relevancy of admissions made by the following persons:
- Party to proceeding or his agent: Admissions made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorized by him to make them, are admissions.
- Suitor in representative character: Statements made by parties to suits, suing or sued in a representative character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them held that character.
- Party interested in subject-matter: Statements made by persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject-matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested, are admissions.
- Person from whom interest derived: Statements made by persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject-matter of the suit, are admissions, if they are made during the continuance of the interest of the persons making the statements.
Examples of admissions
The following are some examples of admissions:
- A defendant in a criminal case admits to committing the crime.
- A party to a civil case admits to a particular fact, such as the existence of a contract.
- A person with an interest in the subject-matter of a proceeding makes a statement that is relevant to the case. For example, a landlord may admit that they did not make repairs to a property, which is relevant to a tenant’s claim for damages.
Relevancy of admissions
Admissions are relevant evidence against the person who makes them or against the person on whose behalf they are made. This is because admissions are considered to be reliable evidence, as they are made against the person’s own interest.
Exceptions to the rule on admissibility of admissions
There are a few exceptions to the rule on the admissibility of admissions. For example, admissions made under duress or coercion are not admissible in evidence. Additionally, admissions made by a person who is insane or mentally incompetent are also not admissible in evidence.
Conclusion- Section 17 of Evidence Act
Admissions are an important type of evidence in Indian law. They can be used to prove a variety of facts, such as the existence of a contract, the commission of a crime, or the ownership of property. However, it is important to note that there are a few exceptions to the rule on the admissibility of admissions.
Here are some case laws on Section 17 of Evidence Act and Section 18 of the Evidence Act, 1872:
Section 17 of Evidence Act
- State of Punjab v. Kartar Singh (AIR 1994 SC 672): The Supreme Court of India held that in order for a statement to qualify as an admission, it must be made by a party to the proceeding or his agent. The Court further held that the statement must be against the person’s interest.
- Ramachandra v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1999 SC 2501): The Supreme Court of India held that an admission made by a party to a proceeding is admissible in evidence against him, even if the admission is made in a different proceeding.
Section 18
- R v. Matthews ([1980] 71 Cr App R 280): The House of Lords held that a statement made by an agent to his principal is admissible in evidence against the principal, if the statement was made in the course of the agent’s employment and was within the scope of his authority.
- State of Punjab v. Kartar Singh (AIR 1994 SC 672): The Supreme Court of India held that a statement made by a person who has a proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject-matter of the proceeding is admissible in evidence against that person, even if the statement is made in a different proceeding.
Application of Section 18
The following are some examples of how Section 18 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has been applied in practice:
- In a criminal case, the prosecution may introduce a statement made by the defendant to their lawyer as evidence against the defendant. This is because the lawyer is considered to be the defendant’s agent.
- In a civil case, a party may introduce a statement made by the other party’s landlord as evidence against the other party. This is because the landlord has a proprietary interest in the subject-matter of the proceeding, which is the ownership of the property.
Section 17 and Section 18 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 are important provisions that deal with the admissibility of admissions in evidence. These provisions allow courts to consider reliable evidence that is against the person’s own interest.