Question: A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the statement of A made voluntarily admissible? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the… Read More »

Question: A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the statement of A made voluntarily admissible? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the statement of A made voluntarily admissible? Answer Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code states that judicial confession can rely on as proof of guilt against...

Question: A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the statement of A made voluntarily admissible?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites [A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of B. Is the statement of A made voluntarily admissible?

Answer

Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code states that judicial confession can rely on as proof of guilt against the accused person if it appears to the court to be voluntary and true. A conviction may be based on judicial confession.

Section 24 of the Evidence Act lays down the rule for the exclusion of the confession which is made non-voluntarily. This principle of exclusion applies only to statement which amount to a confession. If a statement falls short of a confession, that is, it does not admit the guilt in terms or sustainability all the facts which constitute the offence, it will be admissible even if made to a policeman, for example, the statement of an accused to the police that he witnessed the murderer in question. The statement being not a confession was received in evidence against him, as showing his presence on the spot.

A confessional statement made by a person to the police during an investigation or even before he is accused of any offence is equally irrelevant. The section clearly says that such a statement cannot be proved against any person accused of any offence. This means that even if the accusation is subsequent to the statement, the statement cannot be proved.

Further, Section 26 provides that a confession that is made in the custody of a police officer cannot be proved against him unless it is made before a magistrate.

Now the settled law is that a conviction can be based on confession only if it is proved to be voluntary and true. If corroboration is needed it is enough that the general trend of the confession is substantiated by some evidence that would tally with the contents of the confession. In this case, general corroboration is sufficient to uphold the conviction of the accused.

However, as explicitly made irrelevant under sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, a confession to the police officer is the confession made by the accused while in the custody of a police officer is never relevant and can never be proved under these sections.

Now as for the extra-judicial confession and confession made by the accused to some magistrate to whom he has been sent by the police for the purpose during the investigation, they are admissible only when they are made voluntarily.

If the making of the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient in the opinion of the court to give the accused person grounds, which would appear to him reasonable for supporting that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceeding against him, it will not be relevant and it cannot be proved against the person making the statement.

Therefore, in the present case at hand, when A, an accused voluntarily makes a statement to a police officer that he committed the murder of, B the statement of A made voluntarily is irrelevant and hence is not admissible unless it is made before a magistrate.


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 2021-10-05T10:57:47+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story