Statements Under Special Circumstances — Books of Account, Public Records, Maps, Law Books (ss. 28–33) — BSA (Law of Evidence) Notes

Statements Under Special Circumstances — Books of Account, Public Records, Maps, Law Books (ss. 28–33)

A moneylender sues for a loan and produces his own ledger, page after page, showing the borrower deep in debt. It looks unanswerable — the books are contemporaneous and detailed. But the law is wary of a man proving a debt out of a book he himself wrote, so it says: yes, the entries are relevant — but they can never, by themselves, fasten liability on anyone.

Sections 28 to 33 admit a cluster of routine, reliable records without dragging their makers to court. They rest on the same necessity-plus-reliability logic as the rest of the unit.

A. Section 28 — entries in books of account

Entries in books of account (including those kept in electronic form) that are regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter the court has to inquire into. But — and this is the whole exam point — such entries shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. The creditor must still prove the debt by independent evidence; the ledger only supports it.

B. Sections 29–33 — the rest, in one breath

s. 29 — an entry in a public or official record (or electronic record) made in the performance of duty is relevant.
s. 30 — statements in maps, charts and plans generally offered for public sale, or made under government authority, are relevant.
s. 31 — a statement of a fact of a public nature in a recital of a Central/State Act, or in a government notification/gazette, is relevant.
s. 32 — statements as to any law contained in law books (including a State’s official reports of decisions) are relevant.
s. 33 — when a statement forms part of a longer conversation, document, book or series of letters, so much of the whole as is necessary to understand it may be given.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — the account-book debt

Facts. ‘A’ sues ‘B’ for Rs. 10,000 and produces his regularly-kept account books showing B owing that sum. Are the entries relevant, and do they prove the debt?

Rule. Section 28: regularly-kept account-book entries are relevant, but are not sufficient alone to charge a person with liability.

Apply. The entries, being regularly kept in the course of business, are relevant. But s. 28 expressly bars using them, by themselves, to fix B with the debt — A needs independent proof (a receipt, a witness, an admission).

Conclusion. The entries are relevant but not sufficient; without corroboration A cannot recover on the books alone.

Section 28, BSA 2023: “Entries in the books of account, including those maintained in an electronic form, regularly kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability.”

In Simple Terms: A businessman’s regular account books can be shown to the court and are relevant — but the court will not hold someone liable on the strength of those books alone; there must be something more.

flowchart TD
    ROOT["Special-circumstance records (ss. 28-33)"]:::root
    ROOT --> A["s. 28 — account books<br/>relevant, NOT sufficient alone"]:::diamond
    ROOT --> B["s. 29 — public/official records"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> C["s. 30 — maps, charts, plans"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> D["s. 31 — Acts/notifications (public facts)"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> E["s. 32 — law books · s. 33 — rest of a statement"]:::leaf
    classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:1px,color:#000;
    classDef leaf fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
    classDef diamond fill:#FDECEA,stroke:#B22222,color:#000;
    linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;

Case Laws

Central Bureau of Investigation vs V.C. Shukla (1998) — entries in books of account (the “Jain hawala diaries”) are relevant under s. 34 IEA (now s. 28) but are not sufficient alone to charge any person with liability; independent corroboration is required.
Chandradhar Goswami vs Gauhati Bank (1967) — mere account-book entries, without proof of the underlying transaction, cannot fix a person with liability.

📄 Full notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past KSLU questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · 10 Solved Problems · All BSA (Law of Evidence) topics