Definition of Admission (Section 20 BSA)

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) defines admission as a statement made by a party to the proceedings or by a person whose position in relation to the proceedings is relevant.

Distinction between Admission and Statement

• Definition in BSA: Section 20(1) BSA defines an admission as "a statement, oral or documentary or electronic record which implies an admission of any fact or liability in any civil case."

• Scope: Importantly, this definition in the BSA is limited to civil cases. Admissions in criminal cases are treated differently and fall under the category of confessions or statements against interest.

• Distinction:

  • Nature: Admissions are statements that suggest any fact in issue or relevant fact. They are made by a party to a civil proceeding.

  • Purpose: Admissions are used to prove or disprove facts in civil cases.

  • Criminal vs. Civil: While the BSA explicitly defines admissions for civil cases, statements in criminal cases that are against the interest of the accused are treated as confessions or under other relevant sections.

Who may make Admissions

The BSA outlines specific categories of individuals whose statements can be treated as admissions.

Persons expressly referred to by parties

• Section 20(2)(a) BSA: A statement made by a person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information on the subject of a matter in dispute is an admission.

• Example: If A sues B for damages for faulty goods, and A had previously consulted an independent expert C about the goods and referred B to C for information, then a statement made by C about the goods would be an admission by A against B.

Persons whose position it is necessary to prove

• Section 20(2)(c) BSA: A statement made by a person whose position or liability it is necessary to prove in a suit, in relation to the subject-matter of that suit, is also an admission.

• Example: If a suit is filed against a company for the negligence of its employee, any admission made by that employee regarding his negligence would be relevant against the company, as proving the employee's position and liability is necessary to prove the company's liability.

Other persons whose statements can be admissions include parties themselves, their agents, and persons in special character or relationship to the parties.

Relevancy of Admissions

Admissions are relevant as they can significantly help in proving or disproving facts in civil cases.

Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop

• Section 20(3) BSA: Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, but they may operate as an estoppel under the provisions hereinafter contained.

• Not Conclusive Proof: This means that even if a party makes an admission, it does not automatically conclude the matter. The opposing party can still present evidence to disprove the admitted fact.

• Estoppel: However, an admission can create an estoppel. Estoppel prevents a person from denying a fact which they have previously admitted, especially if another person has acted upon that admission to their detriment. Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, likely retained or modified in BSA, deals with the doctrine of estoppel.

• Purpose: Admissions are relevant because they simplify the issues in a case by admitting certain facts, and they can provide strong evidence against the party making them.

Admissions in Civil and Criminal Cases

The BSA explicitly defines admissions primarily for civil cases, while statements made by accused in criminal cases are treated as confessions or under other specific provisions.

• Civil Cases: Section 20 BSA applies directly to admissions in civil cases. These statements, if made by parties or persons whose position is relevant, can be used to prove or disprove facts.

• Criminal Cases: In criminal proceedings, statements made by an accused person that are against their interest, admitting guilt, are treated as 'confessions' under Section 21 of the BSA. The rules for confessions are generally stricter due to concerns about voluntariness and potential coercion.

• Distinction is Key: The distinction between admissions (primarily civil) and confessions (primarily criminal) is crucial, as they are governed by different rules regarding admissibility and proof.

Definition of Confession (Section 21 BSA)

The BSA defines a confession as a statement made by an accused person which implicates them in the commission of an offence.

Distinction between Admission and Confession

• Definition in BSA: Section 21(1) BSA defines "confession" as "a statement oral or documentary or electronic record which implies admission of guilt of an offence in a criminal case."

• Key Differences:

  • Scope: Admissions are generally used in civil cases, while confessions are specific to criminal cases and relate to the guilt of the accused.

  • Nature of Statement: An admission is a statement that suggests any fact in issue or relevant fact. A confession is a statement that directly or indirectly admits guilt of an offence.

  • Admissibility: Admissions made by parties in civil cases are generally relevant against them. Confessions in criminal cases, however, must be voluntary to be admissible. Confessions made under inducement, threat, or promise are inadmissible.

  • Burden of Proof: An admission is a piece of evidence that can be proved or disproved. A confession, if voluntary and proved, can be strong evidence of guilt.

Relevancy of Confessions

The relevancy of confessions in criminal cases is subject to strict conditions, primarily focusing on voluntariness.

Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise (Section 22 BSA)

• Inadmissibility: Section 22 BSA states that a confession made by an accused, whether in the course of police investigation or otherwise, shall be irrelevant if it appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise, proceeding from a person in authority, and having reference to the charge against the accused, tending to make the accused believe that by making it he would gain any advantage concerning the proceedings or that he would suffer any disadvantage concerning the proceedings if he did not make it.

• Inducement, Threat, Promise: For a confession to be irrelevant under this section, the inducement, threat, or promise must be:

  • Proceeding from a person in authority (e.g., police officer, Magistrate).

  • Related to the charge against the accused.

  • Likely to make the accused believe that he would gain an advantage or suffer a disadvantage.

• Purpose: This rule ensures that confessions are voluntary and reliable, protecting individuals from being coerced into making false admissions.

Confession made while in custody of police

• Section 22(2) BSA: A confession made by a person while in the custody of a police officer, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be irrelevant.

• Exception: The only exception is if the confession is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, in which case it is admissible.

• Purpose: This is a critical safeguard against custodial torture and the extraction of false confessions by the police.

Confession to police officer

• General Rule: Confessions made directly to a police officer (unless in the immediate presence of a Magistrate) are generally inadmissible in evidence because of Section 22(2) BSA.

• Exception: If a police officer discovers any fact in consequence of information received from the accused in a confession, so much of that information as distinctly relates to the fact thereby discovered may be proved (Section 23 BSA). This is known as the "discovery rule" or "Explanation to Section 21" in some contexts, and it allows for the admission of the fact discovered, even if the confession leading to it was inadmissible.

Confession affecting person making it and others

Generally, a confession made by one accused person is relevant only against himself and not against any co-accused, unless there are specific circumstances.

• Section 21(3) BSA: If a confession is made by several persons accused of the same offence, and such confession relates sufficiently to the facts so supposed as to affect the maker, then the confession is relevant not only against the maker but also against all the co-accused, provided it relates sufficiently to the facts so supposed as to affect the maker.

• Common Intention/Conspiracy: This rule is often applied in cases where there is evidence of a common intention or conspiracy among the accused. If a confession by one accused reveals the common plan and implicates others in a way that sufficiently relates to the common design, it can be relevant against them.

• Cautionary Approach: Courts usually approach such evidence with caution, especially against co-accused, and require corroboration.

Confession given by accused persons

This is a general statement referring to the entire body of rules governing confessions made by accused individuals.

• Admissibility: The primary condition for the admissibility of a confession is its voluntariness. It must not be induced by threat, promise, or inducement, nor made under police custody unless in the presence of a Magistrate.

• Evidentiary Value: A voluntary and properly recorded confession can be strong evidence of guilt. However, courts often look for corroborative evidence, especially if the confession is self-serving or made under circumstances that raise doubts about its reliability.

• Sections 21 and 22 BSA: These sections are central to the admissibility and relevancy of confessions made by accused persons.