Question: A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant? Answer Section 25 of the Indian Evidence… Read More »

Question: A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant? Answer Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act talks about Confession to police officers not to be proved. It states: No confession made to a police officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence....

Question: A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused makes a confession to a police constable B. Is the confession made by A to B, relevant?

Answer

Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act talks about Confession to police officers not to be proved.

It states:

No confession made to a police officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. In section 25 the test for excluding the confession is “to whom was it made”. If it was made to a police officer, it must be rejected, unless made in the presence of a magistrate.

Black’s Law Dictionary defines a police officer as someone “responsible for preserving public order, promoting public safety, and preventing and detecting crime”

In Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed v. Emperor (‘Nanoo Sheikh’) AIR 1927 Bom 4, it was held therein that “it is not merely the name given to an officer that should determine whether he is a Police-officer, but the substantial fact whether he exercises the powers of a Police officer conferred upon him by law”, thereby holding excise officers to be police officers since they possessed the same powers of investigation as an officer-in-charge of a police station.

In Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar on 4 May 1965, the court observed that: except as provided by section 27 of the Evidence Act, a confession by an accused to a police officer is absolutely protected under section 25 of the Evidence Act, and if it is made in the course of an investigation, it is also protected by section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and a confession to any other person made by him while in the custody of a police officer is protected by section 26, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate.

These provisions seem to proceed upon the view that confessions made by an accused to a police officer or made by him while he is in the custody of a police officer are not to be trusted, and should not be used in evidence against him. They are based upon grounds of public policy, and the fullest effect should be given to them.

In the present case at hand, the accused made his confession to a police constable who is very much under the definition of who is police for the purpose of section 25. Hence, by virtue of the section such confession of A shall not be held admissible against him unless proved that he has made it voluntarily and out of free will as corroborated by other cogent evidence.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-II
  3. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-III
  4. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-10-05T10:43:25+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story