Section 23 IEA: Admissions in civil cases when relevant

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 23 IEA at a Glance

Section 23 IEA deals with admissions in civil cases when relevant. From 1 July 2024 it is replaced by Section 21 BSA.

Now BSA

Section 23 IEA Bare Act Text

23. Admissions in civil cases when relevant
In civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.
Explanation
Nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence under section 126.

Source: Section 23, Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 23 IEA in Simple Words

Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 kept protected admissions out of court in civil cases. Under the Act, an admission was not relevant (could not be relied on in court) in a civil case when it was made under a condition or agreement keeping it out of evidence.

An admission was not relevant if a party made it under an express condition (a clearly stated term) barring anyone from giving evidence of that statement. It was also not relevant when the surrounding circumstances allowed the court to infer (conclude from the facts) a joint agreement between the parties to keep the statement out of evidence.

Section 23 IEA also contained an Explanation for legal representatives. The rule did not exempt a barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil (types of legal practitioners) from testifying about any matter where Section 126 IEA, which covers professional communications, allowed the court to compel testimony.

When Section 23 IEA Applies

The rule applied only to admissions in civil cases.
A party made the admission under an express condition barring anyone from giving evidence of it.
Alternatively, the circumstances let the court infer a mutual agreement between the parties not to give evidence of the admission.

Example of Section 23 IEA

In 2022, Ramesh and Anita met in Pune to discuss settling a civil suit over a shop lease. At the start of the meeting, Ramesh stated an express condition that any admission made during the talk was not to be given as evidence in court. The settlement talk failed, and Anita later tried to rely on that admission before the civil court. Under Section 23 IEA, the admission was not relevant, so Anita could not give evidence of it in the civil suit.

When Section 23 IEA Does Not Apply

The rule did not exempt a barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil from testifying on a matter where Section 126 IEA, covering professional communications, allowed the court to compel disclosure.

Section 23 IEA in the BSA

Section 23 IEA is now covered under Section 21 BSA.

Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 became Section 21 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on 1 July 2024. No substantive change. "Barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil" reads "advocate", and the cross-reference now points to sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 132.

View detailed comparison (IEA 23 vs BSA 21) →

FAQs on Section 23 IEA

What is Section 23 IEA?▼

Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is the provision that made admissions in civil cases irrelevant when made under a condition or mutual agreement keeping them out of evidence. It applied when the condition was expressly stated or when the court could infer that agreement from the circumstances.

Did Section 23 IEA require a written agreement to keep an admission out of evidence?▼

No. Section 23 IEA applied either when there was an express condition against giving evidence of the admission or when the court could infer from the circumstances that the parties agreed not to give evidence of it.

Did Section 23 IEA apply to criminal cases?▼

No. Section 23 IEA stated that the rule applied in civil cases.

Could a legal practitioner refuse to testify about every matter under Section 23 IEA?▼

No. Under the Explanation to Section 23 IEA, a barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil was not exempt from testifying on any matter where Section 126 IEA on professional communications allowed the court to compel evidence.

What is Section 23 IEA in BSA?▼

Section 21 BSA. Section 23 IEA became Section 21 BSA on 1 July 2024 with no substantive change, except that the Explanation replaces barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil with advocate and refers to sub-sections (1) and (2) in Section 132 BSA.

Have questions about Section 23 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 ·