Section 21 IEA: Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 21 IEA at a Glance
Section 21 IEA deals with proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf. From 1 July 2024 it is replaced by Section 19 BSA.
Section 21 IEA Bare Act Text
21. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf
Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; but they cannot 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 third persons 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.
Illustrations(a) The question between A and B is whether a certain deed is or is not forged. A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged.
A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a statement by A that deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged.
(b) A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away.
Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course.
A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under section 32, clause (2).
(c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta.
He produces a letter written by himself and dated at Lahore on that day, and bearing the Lahore post-mark of that day.
The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be admissible under section 32, clause (2).
(d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen.
He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value.
A may prove these statements, though they are admissions, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.
(e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit coin which he knew to be counterfeit.
He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the coin as he doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that that person did examine it and told him it was genuine.
A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last preceding illustration.
Source: Section 21, Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 21 IEA in Simple Words
Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 set out who could prove an admission in court. An admission was relevant and could be proved against the person who made it, or against that person's representative in interest (someone who holds or succeeds to that person's legal interest). By contrast, the maker, someone acting on the maker's behalf, or a representative in interest could not prove the admission in their own favour.
Section 21 IEA allowed an admission to be proved by or for its maker only under sub-sections (1), (2), and (3). Under sub-section (1), the statement could be proved if Section 32 IEA would have made it relevant between third persons had the maker died. Section 32 IEA covered statements of relevant facts by persons who had died or could not be found, including routine business books or a postmarked letter's date under Section 32, clause (2).
Under sub-section (2), the maker could prove a statement about a relevant or disputed mental or bodily state made around the time it existed, with conduct making its falsehood improbable. Under sub-section (3), the maker could prove an admission that was relevant on another ground, such as explaining behaviour linked to the facts in dispute.
When Section 21 IEA Applies
- A party in a case may prove an admission against the person who made it, or against someone who holds or succeeds to that person's legal interest.
- Under sub-section (1), the person who made an admission (or someone on the maker's behalf) may prove it if, assuming the maker had died, Section 32 IEA would make the statement relevant in a dispute between third persons.
- Under sub-section (2), the maker (or someone on the maker's behalf) may prove an admission that states the existence of a relevant or disputed mental or bodily state at or around the time it existed, accompanied by conduct that makes its falsehood improbable.
- Under sub-section (3), the maker (or someone on the maker's behalf) may prove an admission when the statement is relevant on a basis other than being an admission.
Example of Section 21 IEA
When Section 21 IEA Does Not Apply
- A person who makes an admission, someone acting for that maker, or a representative in interest is barred from proving the admission in their own favour unless it falls within sub-section (1), (2), or (3).
- The prohibition against a maker proving an admission does not apply in the situations under sub-sections (1), (2), and (3), namely when Section 32 IEA would make it relevant between third persons if the maker had died, when it is a contemporaneous statement of a mental or bodily state backed by conduct making falsehood improbable, or when it is relevant on another ground.
Section 21 IEA in the BSA
Section 21 IEA is now covered under Section 19 BSA.
Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 19 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024. No substantive change. Illustrations use other place names and "currency" for "coin", and cited clause numbers follow the BSA.
View detailed comparison (IEA 21 vs BSA 19) →FAQs on Section 21 IEA
What is Section 21 IEA?▼
Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 governed who could prove admissions in court. It allowed admissions to be proved against the person who made them or against a representative in interest. It barred the maker from proving an admission in the maker's own favour, except under sub-sections (1), (2), and (3).
Can a party prove an admission made by that same party under Section 21 IEA?▼
No, except in the specific cases listed in sub-sections (1), (2), and (3) of Section 21 IEA. A maker could prove the admission only if Section 32 IEA would make it relevant between third persons upon the maker's death, if it stated a contemporaneous mental or bodily state accompanied by conduct making falsehood improbable, or if it was relevant on a basis other than being an admission.
Can a business record or a postmarked letter written by a party be proved by that party under Section 21 IEA?▼
Yes. As shown in the illustrations to Section 21 IEA, routine daily observations recorded in a business book or the date on a letter bearing that day's postmark could be proved by the writer under sub-section (1), because those statements would be admissible between third parties under Section 32, clause (2) if the writer had died.
What is Section 21 IEA in BSA?▼
Section 19 BSA replaced Section 21 IEA on 1 July 2024. The rule on when admissions can be proved against or on behalf of the maker remains unchanged.
Have questions about Section 21 IEA?
Ask NyayGuru for a plain language explanation, or how it applies to your situation.
Ask NyayGuru →Disclaimer: This is for informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified advocate for legal advice.
Sources: Bare Act Text, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ·