Section 17-23 of the Evidence Act deals with the provision of the Evidence Act. Admission is a statement,8A[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.
So here the statement can be made in the oral, document, or in the electronic medium. The admission made before the court is totally admissible under section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act. The extra-judicial admission (informal admission) will be admissible after the court is convinced that it’s a genuine admission. The admission can be made in the reference to the fact in issue or the relevant fact.
It is mostly made in civil cases and is voluntary in nature. All confessions are admission but not all admissions are confession. Admission is not always conclusive in nature. Section 18 says that “Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorized by him to make them, are admissions.
As per Section 19 persons whose position or liability is necessary to prove as against any party to the suit if statements are made during the continuance of such position or liability, and such as would be relevant as against such persons in relation or liability in a suit brought by them. As per Section 20, a person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute.
In the case of Basant Singh v Janki Singh the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that the admission made under section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act in the previous cases can be referred to in the other pending cases. But that admission will not be conclusive in nature.
In Pakala Narayan Swami v. Emperor, the accused admitted his guilt in front of the police, and later during the trial, he refused to identify the accused. Here the Hon’ble Court held that the admission before the police will not amount to the confession as there was the admission of guilt by him.
Section 31 of the Indian Evidence Act talks about that the admissions are not conclusive proof of the matter admitted, but it may operate as an estoppel. A person can’t deny the fact he admitted in court.
A person’s behavior and his personal conduct can be also inferred as admission. In the famous leading case of Mayo v Mayo (1949 P 172), a woman registered the birth of her child but did not enter the name of the father or his profession. The court said that either she did not know who the father was or she was admitting that the child is illegitimate.