Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question refers to an exception to the general rule against hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence (a statement made by a person not before the court) is generally inadmissible. However, the Indian Evidence Act makes certain statements made by persons who are dead, cannot be found, or are otherwise unavailable to testify, relevant and admissible.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The primary provision governing the admissibility of statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses is Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. This section is titled "Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant." It contains eight clauses listing different circumstances under which such statements are admissible.
Let's analyze the options:
\begin{itemize}
\item (A) S.48 deals with the relevancy of opinion as to the existence of a general custom or right.
\item (B) S.49 deals with the relevancy of opinion as to usages, tenets, etc.
\item (C) S.32 (4) is a clause within Section 32. It makes a statement of a deceased person relevant if it gives an opinion as to the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general interest, made before any controversy had arisen. Since this option falls under the main Section 32, which deals with statements of dead persons, it is the correct choice among the given options.
\item (D) S.13 (a) deals with facts which are relevant when any right or custom is in question, such as any transaction by which the right or custom was created, claimed, modified, etc.
\end{itemize}
While Section 32 in its entirety covers statements of dead persons, S.32(4) is the only option provided from that section, making it the correct answer. The most famous clause, S.32(1), pertains to dying declarations.
Step 3: Final Answer:
The statements of dead persons are made relevant under the provisions of Section 32 of the Evidence Act, and option S.32 (4) is a part of that provision.