Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter II: Of the Relevancy of Facts · Admissions
Section 17: Admission defined
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
An admission is a statement, [oral or documentary or contained in electronic form], which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 17
-
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned judgment relying on the confessional FIR filed by the appellant-accused himself and the medical evidence to uphold his conviction, however, altering it from s.302,…
-
P Krishna Mohan Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Whether the statement of an accused u/s.161, Cr.P.C implicating co-accused can be looked into qua such co-accused at the stage of anticipatory bail or regular bail; whether the High Court exercised its discretion in a…
-
Rajiv Ghosh v. Satya Naryan Jaiswal
In view of the unequivocal admission made by the defendant in his written statement, whether the High Court was right in decreeing the suit for recovery of possession applying Or.XII r.6 of the CPC thereby, affirming…
-
Raja Gounder and Others v. M. Sengodan and Others
A civil suit was filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for partition and separate possession of plaint schedule properties. During the pendency of the suit, appellants were impleaded. The Trial Court recorded a categorical…
- Sukhbiri Devi & Ors v. Union of India & Ors.
- Jafarudheen & Ors. v. State of Kerala
- V. Anantha Raju & Anr v. T.M. Narasimhan & Ors.
- Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel v. State of Gujarat and Another
- Vathsala Manickavasagam & Ors. v. N. Ganesan & Anr.
- State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari & Ors.
- Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin & Anr.
- Mritunjoy Sett (D) by Lrs. v. Jadunath Basak (D) by Lrs
- Saquib Abdul Hameed Nachan v. State of Maharashtra
- Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
- Ram Pat & Ors. v. State of Haryana
- Vinod Solanki v. Union of India & Anr.
- State (N.C.T. of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu@Afsan Guru
- Dr. Karan Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Anr.
- Central Bureau of Investigation v. V.C. Shukla and Ors.
- Bandlamuddi Atchuta Ramaiah and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh