Sections 15 and 16
Introduction
Admissions and confessions are two kinds of statements that help courts reach the truth. These statements are important because they come from a person who has a direct connection to the case. If someone admits something that goes against their own interest, it is likely to be true. That is why the law allows such statements to be used as evidence.
Sections 15 to 21 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023), define what admissions are, who can make them, how they can be proved, and when they are relevant. These rules apply to both civil and criminal cases.
SECTION 15 – Admission Defined
Section 15 of the BSA defines an admission as a statement, either oral, written (documentary) , or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact made by any person or persons herein mentioned. The key condition is that the person making the statement must fall within the categories mentioned in Sections 16 to 20 of the Act.
This section establishes the basic framework for understanding admissions in law. A statement becomes an admission when:
- It is related to a fact in issue or a relevant fact under the BSA.
- It is made in a form legally recognized oral, written, or electronic.
- It is made by a person whose statement the law recognizes as relevant under subsequent sections.
The importance of this section lies in the idea that when someone voluntarily states something that goes against their own interest, especially in a legal context, the chances of that statement being true are high. For this reason, such admissions are allowed to be used in court, even if they would not be allowed under the ordinary rule against hearsay.
Judicial interpretations stress that an admission does not need to be a direct acknowledgment of guilt or liability. Even indirect statements implying a relevant fact can qualify. For example, if in a civil suit for recovery of money, a person says, "I know I owe him something," it is an admission even though it is vague. The courts will examine such statements along with other evidence to determine their weight.
Furthermore, statements made in digital formats like WhatsApp messages, emails, and SMS can qualify as admissions if they meet the criteria of being made voluntarily and by the right person. Courts are now regularly dealing with such forms of communication, and the law acknowledges electronic records.
The evidentiary value of admissions is high but not absolute. They are not conclusive proof, meaning the person who made the statement can explain or contradict it in court. However, once made, the burden of disproving the admission falls on the party who made it. Therefore, Section 15 sets a very wide but logically sound standard for what qualifies as an admission in law.
Relevant Case Law: In the case of Bharat Singh v. Bhagirathi (AIR 1966 SC 405), the Supreme Court observed that admissions, if clearly and unequivocally made, are the best evidence against the party making them, unless they are shown to be untrue or made under a mistaken belief. The Court emphasized that such statements must be taken as true unless successfully rebutted.
SECTION 16 – Admissions by Party to Proceeding or His Agent
Bare Act Provision:
Section 16 states that statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent authorized by such party, are admissions. It also includes statements made by persons suing or being sued in a representative character, provided they were made while they held that character.
(ii) (a) 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; or
(b) persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit,
Detailed Explanation:
Section 16 lays down the principle that admissions made by a party to the case or by someone authorized to act on their behalf are relevant and can be used as evidence. This applies to both plaintiffs and defendants, whether the proceeding is civil or criminal.
The section includes:
- Statements by parties themselves
- Statements by authorized agents
- Statements by persons suing or being sued in a representative character (such as trustees, executors, company directors)
- The statements must be made during the existence of that authority or representative character
This section reflects a basic principle of agency — if someone is legally allowed to speak or act on your behalf, their statements bind you in legal proceedings.
Practical Implications:
- Admissions made by parties themselves carry strong evidentiary value. They directly affect the case because the party is acknowledging a fact that works against them.
- Agents must be authorized. The authorization can be express (e.g., power of attorney) or implied from the nature of the relationship (e.g., an employee making statements within the course of employment).
- The law is careful to ensure that unauthorized statements are not treated as admissions. If a person makes a statement after their legal connection ends, that statement is not admissible under this section.
Illustrations:
- If the director of a company admits in an email that the company breached a contract, and he had authority to handle such matters, the statement is binding on the company.
- A legal guardian in a custody case admits in a court document that the minor was not in their care. That becomes an admission.
Electronic Admissions:
As per the BSA, statements can be in oral, documentary, or electronic form. Therefore, WhatsApp chats, emails, and even recorded phone calls can be valid admissions under this section, provided the identity and authority of the person making the statement is verified.
Important Clarifications from Case Law and Legal Texts:
- The admission must be made voluntarily.
- It must be within the scope of the agent’s authority.
- Statements made before or after the agency or representative relationship may not be valid under this section.
- In representative suits (e.g., under Order I Rule 8 CPC), admissions by one person suing on behalf of others must be carefully examined to determine whether they bind all.
Case Law Example:
State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006)
The Supreme Court held that admissions made by government officers who were duly authorized to manage certain departments could be used against the state in disputes arising from those departments. However, statements made by officers outside their duties or after retirement do not bind the state.
Conclusion:
Section 16 ensures that the legal system can rely on the statements of parties and their agents, provided there is a clear connection, legal authority, and the statement is relevant. It safeguards against misuse by limiting admissibility to statements made during the course of representation or employment.