Multiple choice

‘A’ is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value.

Which of the following is correct?

  1. ‘A’ may prove the statements, though in the nature of admission, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.

  2. ‘A’ may not prove the statements because they are self-serving admissions.

  3. ‘A’ may not prove the statements because as accused he cannot be a witness in his own defence.

  4. All these are incorrect.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
A Correct answer
Explanation

Option A is correct. Section 8 of the Evidence Act provides that conduct (including statements) is relevant when influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact. Here, A's refusal to sell below value is conduct explaining his state of mind (lack of guilty knowledge). Section 21 states admissions are relevant and can be proved by the person who made them or on whose behalf they were made. A can prove his own explanatory statements about conduct that are admissions. This is not 'self-serving' - it's relevant to the fact in issue (guilty knowledge).

Keep practicing — related questions