Advanced Search Options : ❯
Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
35. . - An entry in any public or other official book, register or ^1[record or an electronic record], stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty, or by any other person in performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law of the country in which such book, register or ^2[record or an electronic record], is kept, is itself a relevant fact. ************* NOTES:- 1. Subs. by s. 92 and the Second Sch... ... ...
Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES 34. . - ^1[Entries in the books of account, including those maintained in an electronic form], regularly kept in the course of business, are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. Illustration A sues B for Rs. 1,000, and shows entries in his account books showing B to be indebted to him to this amount. The entr... ... ...
Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
33. . - Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under... ... ...
Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO CANNOT BE CALLED AS WITNESSES 32. . - Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases: - (1) When it relates to cause of death. - When the statement is ... ... ...
Section 31 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Admissions are not conclusive proof of matters admitted, but may operate as estoppels where applicable provisions governing estoppel are satisfied. Their evidentiary character remains non-final, although they may have binding legal consequences that prevent a party from departing from an admitted position in circumstances governed by estoppel, as legally applicable.
Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 permits a court, where more than one person is jointly tried for the same offence, to take into consideration a proved confession made by one accused that affects both its maker and one or more co-accused. Consideration is discretionary and may operate against the confessor as well as the implicated co-accused.
Section 29 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
29. . - If such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practiced on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be giv... ... ...
Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
28. . - If such a confession as is referred to in section 24 is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant. =============... ... ...
Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
27. . - Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered inconsequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police-officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved. =============... ... ...
Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 26 creates an evidentiary bar against proving a confession made by a person while in police custody. Proof is permitted only where the confession is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. A village head discharging magisterial functions is excluded from the meaning of Magistrate unless exercising magisterial powers under criminal procedure law, while a coroner is recognised as a Magistrate for this purpose.
-
SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. For the Applicant : Mr Taraq Sayed with Ms Ashwini, Ms Alisha Parekh and Mr. Advait Tamhankar For the Respondent -State : Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP Mr. Pawale, PSI, ANC, Azad Maidan Police Station, present. P.C.: 1. By this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. the Applicant seeks enlargement on bail in NDPS Special Case No.580 of 2021 pending on the file of learned Special Judge, (N.D.P.S.) Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, for the offences punishable u... ... ...
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Confessions made to a police officer cannot be proved against a person accused of an offence. The exclusion operates as an evidentiary restriction on using a police-obtained confessional statement against the accused in criminal proceedings. The provision addresses admissibility in relation to proof against the accused, while statements made to a police officer during investigation are separately associated with the procedural treatment of investigative statements.
Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
A confession is irrelevant in criminal proceedings if it was caused by an inducement, threat or promise related to the charge, proceeding from a person in authority. The influence must be sufficient to give the accused reasonable grounds to believe that confession would secure a temporal advantage or avoid a temporal evil in relation to the proceedings.
Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Admissions in civil cases are irrelevant where made on an express condition that they will not be proved, or where circumstances permit the Court to infer a mutual agreement against their use in evidence. This protection does not exempt a barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil from giving evidence of matters on which they may be compelled to give evidence under section 126.
Section 22A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Oral admissions concerning the contents of electronic records are generally irrelevant. They become relevant only where the genuineness of the electronic record produced is in question, confining reliance on such admissions to disputes over the record's authenticity rather than its contents alone.
Section 22 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Oral admissions concerning a document's contents are generally irrelevant unless the relying party is entitled to give secondary evidence of those contents or the genuineness of a produced document is disputed. Proof of documentary contents through oral admission is therefore confined to these specified evidentiary situations.
Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Admissions may be proved against their maker or representative in interest, but ordinarily cannot be proved by or on their behalf. Proof by the maker is permitted where the statement would be relevant between third persons if the maker were dead, records a contemporaneous relevant state of mind or body supported by conduct making falsehood improbable, or is relevant independently of its character as an admission. Statements may also be admissible where they explain conduct influenced by facts in issue.
Section 20 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Admissions may arise from statements of a person expressly identified by a party as a source of information on a matter in dispute. Where that party directs another to obtain information from the identified person, that person's statement is treated as an admission against the referring party.
Section 19 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Admissions by persons whose position or liability must be proved against a party are relevant if the statements would be relevant against their makers in litigation concerning that position or liability, and were made while the position or liability subsisted. Thus, where a rent collector denies that rent was due, the tenant's acknowledgment of the rent debt is an admission relevant against the collector.
Section 18 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 18 recognises as admissions statements made by a party and by an expressly or impliedly authorised agent. Statements by a party acting in a representative capacity qualify only when made while that character was held. Statements made by persons with proprietary or pecuniary interests in the subject matter, and by persons from whom parties derive their interest, may constitute admissions when made during the continuance of the maker's interest.