(a) the celebration would be a crime, is

(a) Is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or (b) Would, if true, expose him to a criminal prosecution or suit for damages, Such a statement is itself relevant. Illustration: (i) The question is, whether rent was paid to A for certain land. A letter from A’s deceased agent to A, saying that he had received the rent on A’s account and held it at A’s orders, is a relevant fact. (ii) The question is, whether A and  were legally married.

The statement of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime, is relevant. This section is based on the ground that what a person says against his own interests is very likely to be true. The principle underlying the admissibility of such a statement is that in the ordinary course of business, a person is not likely to make a statement to his own detriment, unless such statement is true. Under the English law, such statements are admissible against third parties only if they are against their pecuniary or proprietary interest. In India, such a restriction does not exist.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

It has been held that a statement made by a deceased in a deed, to the effect that he is governed by the Mitakshara law, is against his proprietary interest, because such a statement implies that he is not the sole and absolute owner of the property. (Sukdeb v. Mritunjoy, 43 CWN 395)


I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out