Section 22 IEA: When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 22 IEA at a Glance

Section 22 IEA deals with when oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant. From 1 July 2024 it is replaced by Section 20 BSA.

Now BSA

Section 20 →

Section 22 IEA Bare Act Text

22. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant

Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove 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.

Source: Section 22, Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 22 IEA in Simple Words

Section 22 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 restricted when a party could use spoken statements to prove what was written inside a document. Under the Act, oral admissions (spoken statements acknowledging a fact) about a document's contents were not relevant in court. A party could not rely on what someone said aloud about a document instead of proving the document itself.

Section 22 IEA allowed oral admissions about a document's contents only in limited situations. Under the secondary evidence exception, the party seeking to prove the spoken admission had to show an entitlement to give secondary evidence (substitute evidence of a document's contents permitted under the rules set out later in the Act) for that document. Until that party established a right to lead secondary evidence under those later rules, the spoken admission remained irrelevant.

An oral admission about a document's contents was also relevant when a document was produced in court and its genuineness was disputed.

When Section 22 IEA Applies

  • When a party proposes to prove spoken admissions about what a document contains, Section 22 IEA makes those spoken statements irrelevant as the default rule.
  • A party seeking to prove an oral admission about a document's contents may do so after showing an entitlement to give secondary evidence of that document under the later rules in the Act.
  • A party may prove an oral admission about a document's contents when the document has been produced and its genuineness is disputed.

Example of Section 22 IEA

In 2022, Anita sues a business partner, Farhan, in a Jaipur court over the payment terms of a written supply contract. Instead of producing the written contract or showing any right to give secondary evidence of it, Anita calls a witness to testify that Farhan orally admitted the payment terms. No produced document has its genuineness disputed because neither side has placed the contract before the court. Under Section 22 IEA, Anita cannot rely on Farhan's spoken admission to prove the payment terms of the written supply contract.

When Section 22 IEA Does Not Apply

  • The bar on proving oral admissions about a document's contents does not apply once the party seeking to prove them establishes a right to give secondary evidence of the document under the later rules of the Act.
  • The bar on oral admissions about a document's contents does not apply when a document is produced and its genuineness is disputed.

Section 22 IEA in the BSA

Section 22 IEA is now covered under Section 20 BSA.

Section 22 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 20 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024. No substantive change to this rule. IEA Section 22A sat beside it for electronic records and has no separate section in the BSA.

View detailed comparison (IEA 22 vs BSA 20) →

FAQs on Section 22 IEA

What is Section 22 IEA?▼

Section 22 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 stated when spoken admissions about a document's contents were relevant. It made such oral admissions irrelevant unless the party offering them proved a right to give secondary evidence of the document under later rules in the Act, or unless a produced document's genuineness was disputed.

Can a party prove what a document says just by proving that the other party orally admitted its contents?▼

No. Under Section 22 IEA, an oral admission about a document's contents was not relevant on its own. The party seeking to prove the spoken admission had to show an entitlement to lead secondary evidence of that document, unless a produced document's genuineness was disputed.

Were oral admissions about a document's contents relevant when the genuineness of the produced document was disputed?▼

Yes. Section 22 IEA allowed oral admissions about a document's contents to be proved when a document produced in court had its genuineness disputed.

What is Section 22 IEA in BSA?▼

Section 20 BSA replaced Section 22 IEA on 1 July 2024 with identical wording and no substantive change to the rule.

Have questions about Section 22 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 ·