Statements Made in Special Circumstances (Sections 28–33 BSA)

Sections 28 to 33 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) — re-enacting Sections 34 to 39 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) — admit as relevant a special class of out-of-court statements that share a common feature: they are made in circumstances that, by their routine, official or public character, carry an inherent guarantee of trustworthiness. Entries in books of account regularly kept in the course of business, entries in public records made by public servants in performance of duty, statements in maps and charts of public authority, statements as to facts of a public nature contained in central or state Acts and notifications, statements as to law contained in law books, and the rule on what evidence may be given when a statement forms part of a conversation, document or electronic record — all are gathered into this short but heavily worked chapter.

The chapter is exam-tested through the entries-in-books category in particular, because every commercial litigation and many criminal investigations turn on the admissibility and weight of business records. The student who masters the architecture of Sections 28 to 33 BSA can navigate the relevancy of a wide range of routine documentary evidence without resorting to the catch-all of necessity that governs the unavailable-witness chapter.

Concept — trustworthiness through routine and officiality

The provisions of Sections 28 to 33 BSA share a single conceptual basis: trustworthiness derived from the routine, official or public character of the statement. An entry made by a clerk in the day-book of a shop in the ordinary course of business, made years before any dispute arose, is unlikely to have been fabricated; an entry made by a sub-registrar in the public record of registered documents is similarly unlikely to be untruthful. The statements gathered in this chapter are admitted because the conditions under which they are made minimise the incentive to invent.

The chapter on relevancy of facts under Section 3 BSA develops the broader logic of which Sections 28 to 33 BSA are one application. The chapter on statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses covers the sister category of statements admissible by reason of unavailability; the present chapter covers statements admissible by reason of the circumstances of their making, regardless of whether the maker is available.

Section 28 BSA — entries in books of account

Section 28 BSA (previously Section 34 IEA) admits entries in books of account, including those maintained in electronic form, regularly kept in the course of business as relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the court has to inquire. The provision attaches an important condition: such entries shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability — the entries must be supported by independent evidence before they can fasten liability on the person sought to be charged.

The condition reflects a settled policy. A trader cannot create evidence in his own favour merely by making entries in his own books; the entries are admissible to corroborate other evidence, but cannot be the sole basis for fastening liability. The Supreme Court has repeatedly applied the rule, holding that the entries must be supported by some other evidence — an admission, an acknowledgment, conduct on the part of the alleged debtor — before the court will record a money-decree.

The provision is closely connected to the documentary chapter. The chapter on documentary evidence — concept and classification develops the general rules on documentary proof, and the chapter on proof of documents — attesting witnesses, handwriting, signature develops the requirements for proving the genuineness of the entries themselves. Section 28 BSA is the relevancy gateway; the documentary chapter governs proof.

Section 29 BSA — entries in public records

Section 29 BSA (previously Section 35 IEA) admits as relevant any entry in any public or other official book, register or record — including an electronic record — stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, made by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty, or by any other person in performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law of the country in which such book, register or record is kept.

The provision is one of the most heavily relied-upon in Indian civil litigation. Entries in the records of birth, death and marriage; entries in the registers of registered documents kept by the sub-registrar; entries in the records of revenue authorities; entries in the records of municipal authorities — all are admitted under this provision. The Supreme Court has emphasised that the public servant must have been acting in discharge of official duty, and the entry must be of a fact that the public servant was duty-bound to record.

The weight of such entries is high because public servants are presumed to have discharged their duties regularly — the presumption flows from Section 119 BSA on presumptions of fact. The chapter on presumptions — may presume, shall presume, conclusive proof develops the operation of these presumptions in trial practice.

Section 30 BSA — statements in maps, charts and plans

Section 30 BSA (previously Section 36 IEA) admits as relevant statements of facts in issue or relevant facts made in published maps or charts generally offered for public sale, or in maps or plans made under the authority of the central or any state government, as to matters usually represented or stated in such maps, charts or plans. The provision is the principal route by which Survey of India maps, revenue maps, and similar official cartographic records enter evidence in property and boundary disputes.

Such maps carry an inherent reliability because they are prepared by skilled officers under government authority, with publication for public use. The condition is that the map or chart must be of a class generally offered for public sale, or made under the authority of government. A private map prepared for a single litigant is not admissible under Section 30 BSA; it must be proved like any other private document under the documentary chapter.

Section 31 BSA — public Acts and notifications

Section 31 BSA (previously Section 37 IEA) admits as relevant any statement of a fact of a public nature contained in any central Act or state Act, or in a central government or state government notification appearing in the respective Official Gazette, or in any printed paper or in electronic or digital form purporting to be such a Gazette. The BSA modernises the IEA's archaic reference to Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the London Gazette, and the Crown Representative; the substantive admissibility rule is the same.

The provision is the route by which the contents of legislative enactments and executive notifications enter evidence on facts of a public nature. The chapter on facts which need not be proved — judicial notice and admitted facts covers the related but broader doctrine that legislative enactments themselves are not facts that need to be proved; their content may be received under judicial notice. Section 31 BSA therefore overlaps with judicial notice but is concerned specifically with statements of fact contained in those enactments.

Section 32 BSA — law books

Section 32 BSA (previously Section 38 IEA) admits as relevant statements of any law of any country contained in books, including in electronic or digital form, purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the government of such country. The provision is invoked principally in cases involving the application of foreign law, where the Indian court must determine the content of foreign legal rules. Authoritative statements in published law books — codes, restatements, official commentaries — are admitted as evidence of the foreign law, supplementing the evidence of expert witnesses on foreign law.

The provision is also occasionally invoked in matters of state law where the central or state government has published authoritative compilations. The reliability rationale is the same as in the other sections of the chapter: a statement published under government authority carries an inherent guarantee of trustworthiness.

Section 33 BSA — statements forming part of larger conversations, documents and records

Section 33 BSA (previously Section 39 IEA) provides that when any statement of which evidence is given forms part of a longer statement, or of a conversation, or part of an isolated document, or is contained in a document which forms part of a book, or part of an electronic record or of a connected series of letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so much, and no more, of the statement, conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters or papers as the court considers necessary in that particular case to the full understanding of the nature and effect of the statement, and of the circumstances under which it was made.

The provision codifies the rule that a statement must be received in context. The proponent cannot extract a single sentence from a long letter or recording and tender it in isolation, because the meaning of the sentence may depend on the surrounding context. The court has the power to require the proponent to tender so much of the larger document as is necessary for full understanding. The provision is heavily invoked in modern electronic-evidence cases, where the proponent of a screenshot or a brief audio clip is required to tender the surrounding electronic record. The chapter on electronic evidence under Section 63 BSA develops the proof requirements that interact with this contextual rule.

Entries in books of account — the corroboration requirement

The most heavily litigated section in the chapter is Section 28 BSA on entries in books of account. The corroboration requirement — that such entries shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability — is critical. The entry is relevant; it is admissible; but it is not, by itself, sufficient to support a money-decree.

The corroborating evidence may take any of several forms. An admission by the alleged debtor that he received the goods or money is the strongest corroboration. An acknowledgment of debt — a confirmation letter, a part-payment, a balance-confirmation slip — is equally strong. Conduct on the part of the alleged debtor consistent with the existence of the liability — deliveries received, services accepted, related correspondence — is admissible as conduct under Section 6 BSA and may corroborate the entries. The chapter on facts connected with the fact in issue under Sections 5 and 6 BSA develops these conduct provisions.

Public records and the presumption of regularity

Section 29 BSA on entries in public records carries an additional doctrinal layer: the presumption that public servants have discharged their duties regularly. The presumption flows from Section 119 BSA, illustration (e), which empowers the court to presume that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. An entry in a public register made by a sub-registrar, a revenue officer or a vital-statistics registrar therefore enters evidence with a built-in presumption of regularity, and the burden of rebuttal lies on the party who challenges the entry.

The presumption is rebuttable — see the chapter on presumptions and the three-tier classification. Where the challenger leads convincing evidence that the entry was irregularly made — that the public servant lacked authority to record the entry, or that the entry was made under inducement, or that procedural requirements were not observed — the presumption falls away. But the burden lies on the challenger, and the entry stands unless that burden is discharged.

Distinguishing this chapter from neighbouring rules

Two distinctions are important.

Sections 28–33 BSA versus Section 26 BSA (unavailable-witness statements). Section 26 BSA admits out-of-court statements of unavailable declarants on the principle of necessity — the maker is dead, missing or incapable. Sections 28 to 33 BSA admit statements regardless of the maker's availability, on the principle of inherent trustworthiness derived from the circumstances of making. The two chapters can overlap — an entry in a book of account by a deceased proprietor is admissible under both — but the conditions and rationales are different. The chapter on statements by unavailable witnesses develops the contrast.

Sections 28–33 BSA versus the documentary chapter. The provisions of this chapter are relevancy gateways: they tell the court whether the statement may be received in evidence. The documentary chapter governs proof: it tells the court how the document containing the statement is to be proved. A book of account entry is admissible under Section 28 BSA but must be proved in accordance with the documentary rules — production of the book, identification by a competent witness, comparison of handwriting where required.

BSA-specific changes — modernisation only

The BSA reproduces Sections 34 to 39 IEA in Sections 28 to 33 BSA without substantive change in admissibility. The modernisations are textual: the words "include those maintained in an electronic form" excluded from the heading of Section 28 BSA (the substance is preserved in the text); the rewriting of Section 31 BSA to refer to central and state Acts, central and state government notifications, and printed or electronic gazettes, in place of the IEA's references to Acts of Parliament of the United Kingdom and the London Gazette; the addition of "including in electronic or digital form" in Section 32 BSA on law books. The classical case law continues to govern. For the side-by-side mapping see our IEA to BSA section-mapping table.

Common pitfalls in answer scripts

Three errors recur.

First, treating Section 28 BSA as authority for fastening liability on the strength of the entries alone. The corroboration requirement is express and absolute. An entry is admissible and may be weighed, but it cannot by itself sustain a money-decree.

Second, treating any private map or chart as admissible under Section 30 BSA. The provision admits only published maps generally offered for public sale, or maps made under government authority. Private maps prepared for litigation are not within the section.

Third, treating these provisions as substitutes for the documentary chapter. They are relevancy provisions; they tell the court whether the statement may be received. The documentary chapter — with its rules on primary and secondary evidence, attesting witnesses, comparison of handwriting — governs how the statement, once admitted, is to be proved.

For the broader topic-cluster of Evidence Act and BSA notes — covering relevancy, admissions, confessions, dying declarations, documentary evidence and the BSA-specific innovations — the chapter index links to every other unit in the syllabus. For the burden-of-proof framework that interacts with these provisions, see our chapter on burden of proof under Sections 101 to 114.

Practical drafting — using these provisions in trial

In a typical commercial suit for recovery of price, counsel for the plaintiff invokes Section 28 BSA to tender the day-book and ledger of the plaintiff firm, and then leads independent evidence — an admission of receipt, a confirmation letter, conduct of the defendant — to satisfy the corroboration requirement. The trial court receives the entries as relevant under Section 28 BSA but does not pass a decree on their strength alone; it weighs the corroborating evidence and then reaches its conclusion on liability.

In a property dispute over boundaries, counsel invokes Section 30 BSA to tender the Survey of India map, the revenue map, and any published cadastral plan. The maps are admitted as evidence of the boundaries shown therein, and the court relies on them subject to any contrary evidence led by the opposite party. In a litigation involving the contents of a long correspondence, Section 33 BSA is invoked to require the opposite party to tender the entire chain rather than selectively extracting a single letter.

Operational checklist for the trial judge

A short operational checklist helps the trial judge cope with the multiplicity of relevancy gateways in this chapter. First, identify the kind of statement: is it an entry in a book of account, an entry in a public record, a statement in a map or chart, a statement in a public Act or notification, a statement in a law book, or a fragment of a longer document? Each falls under a different section, with its own conditions.

Second, identify the maker: in the case of Section 29 BSA, the entry must have been made by a public servant in discharge of official duty, or by another person under a duty enjoined by law. In the case of Section 28 BSA, the entry must have been made in books regularly kept in the course of business. The qualification of the maker is part of the relevancy gateway, and the proponent must establish it before the entry is received.

Third, check for the corroboration requirement under Section 28 BSA. If the proceeding is one to fasten liability on a person on the strength of book entries, the proponent must lead independent corroborating evidence. Failure to lead such evidence is a fatal defect that the trial judge will pick up at the stage of arguments.

Fourth, where the statement is a fragment of a larger document or conversation, apply Section 33 BSA: require the proponent to tender so much of the larger material as is necessary for full understanding of the fragment. Selective extraction is not permitted, and the court will exclude the fragment unless the surrounding context is also placed before it.

Conclusion — trustworthiness through circumstance

Sections 28 to 33 BSA are short but they cover an enormous volume of practical evidence. Every commercial trial, every property dispute, every case involving public records or government notifications turns at some stage on these provisions. The unifying principle is trustworthiness through circumstance — the routine, official or public character of the statement supplies the safeguard against fabrication. The mains aspirant who has internalised the six provisions, their conditions, and their interaction with the documentary chapter and the unavailable-witness chapter will be at home in this corner of the syllabus, and will not be surprised by any statement-in-special-circumstances fact-pattern, however ingeniously the examiner constructs it.

Frequently asked questions

Can a money-decree be passed solely on the strength of entries in books of account under Section 28 BSA?

No. Section 28 BSA (previously Section 34 IEA) expressly states that entries in books of account, even when regularly kept in the course of business, shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. The entries are relevant and admissible, and the court will weigh them as evidence, but they must be supported by independent corroborating evidence — an admission, an acknowledgment, conduct on the part of the alleged debtor — before liability can be fastened.

What kind of public records are admissible under Section 29 BSA?

Section 29 BSA (previously Section 35 IEA) admits entries in any public or other official book, register or record — including in electronic form — stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, when made by a public servant in the discharge of official duty or by another person in performance of a duty enjoined by law. Entries in registers of birth, death and marriage; in the records of registered documents kept by the sub-registrar; in revenue, municipal and corporate-statutory records all fall within the section.

Are private maps admissible under Section 30 BSA on maps and charts?

No. Section 30 BSA admits only published maps generally offered for public sale, or maps made under the authority of the central or state government. A private map prepared for a single litigant is not admissible under the section; it must be proved like any other private document under the documentary chapter, with proof of authorship, accuracy, and the conditions under which it was prepared. The provision is therefore confined to maps with an inherent guarantee of public reliability.

What does Section 33 BSA require when a statement forms part of a larger document or conversation?

Section 33 BSA (previously Section 39 IEA) requires the proponent to tender so much of the larger document, conversation, electronic record, book or series of letters as the court considers necessary for the full understanding of the nature and effect of the statement and of the circumstances in which it was made. The provision codifies the rule that a statement must be received in context. The proponent cannot extract a single sentence in isolation if the surrounding material is needed to make sense of it.

How has the BSA modernised the language of Section 31 BSA on public Acts and notifications?

The BSA replaces the IEA's archaic references to Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the London Gazette, the Government Gazette of any Dominion, and notifications by the Crown Representative, with references to central and state Acts, central and state government notifications appearing in the respective Official Gazette, and any printed paper or electronic or digital form purporting to be such a Gazette. The modernisation aligns the section with the post-independence constitutional framework and with the use of electronic Gazettes.