Section 21 of IEA : Section 21: Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: Ramesh and Suresh are in a legal dispute over the authenticity of a property sale agreement. Ramesh claims the agreement is genuine, while Suresh asserts it is forged.

Application of Section 21:

• Ramesh can present a statement made by Suresh admitting that the agreement is genuine.
• Suresh can present a statement made by Ramesh admitting that the agreement is forged.
• However, Ramesh cannot use his own statement to prove the agreement is genuine, nor can Suresh use his own statement to prove it is forged.

Example 2:

Scenario: Captain Arjun is on trial for allegedly causing his ship to deviate from its intended course, leading to its wreck.

Application of Section 21:

• Captain Arjun can produce a logbook maintained by him in the ordinary course of business, showing daily observations that the ship was on its proper course.
• This logbook is admissible because, if Captain Arjun were dead, it would be relevant between third parties under Section 32.

Example 3:

Scenario: Priya is accused of committing a crime in Mumbai on a specific date. She claims she was in Delhi on that day.

Application of Section 21:

• Priya can produce a letter she wrote, dated, and postmarked from Delhi on the day of the alleged crime.
• The date on the letter is admissible because, if Priya were dead, it would be relevant under Section 32.

Example 4:

Scenario: Raj is accused of knowingly receiving stolen goods. He claims he did not know the goods were stolen.

Application of Section 21:

• Raj can prove that he refused to sell the goods below their market value, indicating he did not know they were stolen.
• This statement is admissible because it explains his conduct influenced by the facts in issue.

Example 5:

Scenario: Anil is accused of possessing counterfeit currency, which he allegedly knew was fake. He claims he was unaware of its counterfeit nature.

Application of Section 21:

• Anil can prove that he asked an expert to examine the currency because he doubted its authenticity, and the expert confirmed it was genuine.
• This statement is admissible as it explains his conduct influenced by the facts in issue.