LAW

OF
EVIDENCE

Submitted by: MUHAMMAD ANAS SHEIKH

Reg no. : BA.LLB/3-20/M01027

Batch no.09

Teacher : Sir Adeel Abid

 ADMISSION

Admission Defined and Explained:

An admission is any statement made by a party to a lawsuit
(either before a court action or during it) which tends to
support the position of the other side or diminish his own
position.
For example, if a husband sues his wife for divorce on the
grounds of adultery, and she states out of court that she
has had affairs, her statement is an admission. Any
admission made by a party is admissible evidence in a
court proceeding that’s why. Attorneys tell their clients not
to talk to anyone about their case or about the events
leading up to it in order to prevent their clients from
making admissions.

SECTION 30
ADMISSION IS DEFINED:
Admission is defined under Section 30 of the qanoon e
shahadat act 1872 as a statement made by witnesses
which shows inference to any fact in issue or relevant fact
in a case. According to this Section, Admission can be in
the form of a document, oral statement or may be
contained in an electronic form.
Law of Evidence Act sections 30 to 36 deal with general
admission whereas Sections 37 to 43 deal with Confession.
A Confession is an admission of guilt by the accused in a
criminal case.
SECTION 31
According to this section, there are five classes of persons
whose statements will be considered as an admission in a
suit. These five classes are:-
1. Admission By Parties To Proceeding:
The statements made by the parties to a proceeding as
against himself is considered as a relevant admission.
Under this Section, the term ‘parties’ not only means the
persons who appear on the record in that capacity but also
includes those persons who are parties to a suit without
appearing. Persons who have an interest in the subject
matter of the suit but are not parties on the record are
also considered as parties in the proceedings and their
statements have the same relevancy as the parties on
record.
2. Admission By The Agent:
The statements made by an agent in a suit would be
admissible as against the person he is representing. The
statements made by an agent are, however, binding only
when they are made during the continuance of his agency.
So, when the agent’s right to interference has come to an
end any statement made by him after that will not have any
effect.
3. Statements Made In Representative Character:
When a person such as trustees, administers, executors
etc., sue or are sued in a representative character, any
statement made by them will only be admissible if made in
their representative character. Any declarations made by
them in their personal capacity will not be taken as an
admission.
4. Statements Made By Person Interest In The Subject
Matter:
In any such suit where several persons are interested
jointly in the subject-matter of the suit, then any admission
made by anyone of the parties will be taken as an
admission against himself as well as the other parties
jointly interested in the subject matter. It does not matter
whether the persons jointly interested in the subject-
matter are suing or being sued jointly or separately.
5. Statements Made By Person From Whom The
Parties Derive Interest:
Any statement made by the predecessor-in-title from who
the party to the suit derives his title will be admissible. But
this will only be held as an admission if the predecessor-
in-title made the declaration while still holding the title and
not after the title has been transferred. The statement
made by the former owner will not be considered as an
admission as against the parties if it was made title has
been passed.
SECTION 32
ADMISSION BY PERSONS WHOSE POSITION MUST BE
PROVED AS AGAINST PARTY TO SUIT:
As general rule statements made by a third party to a suit
are not considered as admissions but this section has an
exception to this rule that the statements made by a third
party as against himself when it affects his position or
liability and when such liability or position is relevant to be
proved as against the party to the suit. The statements
made by the third party, in this case, would only be
relevant if the liability or position of that third party still
exists at the time of the suit.
SECTION 33
ADMISSIONS BY PERSONS EXPRESSLY REFERRED TO BY
PARTY TO SUIT:
This section state that any statement made by such party
will be taken as an admission against the person who
referred to the third party. This Section is another
exception to the general rule that statements made by
strangers are not considered as an admission.
SECTION 34
PROOF OF ADMISSION AGAINST PERSONS MAKING THEM
AND BY OR ON THEIR BEHALF:
According to this section admission may be used against
the party making the admission but it cannot be used by
the party who makes the Admission for his own use. This
Section further lay down exceptions to this rule.That an
Admission can be used by the person for his own use if the
person making such Admission is dead. In this case, such
admission will be relevant. Section 32 lays down that
statements made by persons dead or who cannot be found
may be proved if it was made under the circumstances
mentioned in the Section.
1. State Of Body & Mind:
An Admission made by a person regarding the existence of
the state of body or mind relevant can be used by the
person making such Admission if such a state of body or
mind existed.
2. Statement Relevant Otherwise Than As Admission:
An Admission made by a person may be used by the person
making it if it is proved that the statement is relevant
otherwise than as Admission.
SECTION 35
ORAL ADMISSIONS AS TO THE CONTENTS OF
DOCUMENTS:
This section state that, when there is a document then
nobody can be allowed to prove the content of that
document. However, there are some exceptions to this rule
that In the case the party is entitled to give secondary
evidence of the contents of the documents then he can rely
on oral Admission.
In the case where the original document is lost or if it is in
the possession of the opposition party, then also the party
may make oral Admission.
SECTION 35-A
ORAL ADMISSION AS TO THE CONTENTS OF ELECTRONIC
RECORDS
When there is an electronic record then nobody can rely
on the oral Admission unless there is a question to the
genuineness of such record.
SECTION 36
ADMISSION IN CIVIL CASES
According to section 36 an Admission in a civil case will
not be relevant if it is declared that upon the express
condition made by the parties to the suit that the
Admission should not be given or under some
circumstances the court infers that the parties have made
an agreement that Admissions will not be given. This
section lays down that when an Admission is given without
prejudice then such Admission will not be considered as
relevant.

Admission in Corporations or Companies:

The act of the corporation or company by which an
individual acquires the rights of a member of such
corporation or company. In trading and joint stock
corporations no vote of admission is requisite; for any
person who owns stock therein, either by original
subscription or by conveyance, is in general entitled to,
and cannot be refused, the rights and privileges of a
member.
Admissions Are Express or Implied:
An express admission is one made in direct terms. An
admission may be implied from the silence of the party,
and may be presumed. As for instance, when the existence
of the debt, or of the particular right, has been asserted in
his presence, and he has not contradicted it. And an
acquiescence and endurance, when acts are done by
another, which if wrongfully done, are encroachments, and
call for resistance and opposition, are evidence, as a tacit
admission that such acts could not be legally resisted.
CASE LAWS :
1. RAFERTTY V. SCURRY
In Rafferty v. Scurry (1997),the Twelfth Appellate District
held that no expert testimony was necessary to establish
breach of duty when the record included an unanswered
(and thus admitted) request for admission that established
that the defendant "breached his duty to appellee by failing
to provide competent legal services.
2. STATE V. STRASZKWOSKI
In State v. Straszkowski, 2008 he Wisconsin Supreme
Court held “that no admission of guilt from a defendant is
required for a read-in offence to be dismissed and
considered for sentencing purposes. Straszkowski is
considered to have abrogated contrary language in State
v. Floyd and other cases.
3. PEOPLE V. FALSETTA
In People v. Falsetta (1999) the Supreme Court held section
108, which permits admission of past sexual offences as
propensity evidence, did not offend due process because
the statute has a safeguard against the use of uncharged
sex offence in cases where the admission of such evidence
could result in an unfair trial. Thanks