All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Direction: Given legal principles to the fa... Start Learning for Free
Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answer
Principle: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.
Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?
  • a)
    No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.
  • b)
    Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.
  • c)
    Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.
  • d)
    Both (A) and (C)
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your CLAT doubts with EduRev
Most Upvoted Answer
Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of t...
Explanation:

Principle:
- No confession made to a Police Officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.

Facts:
- Ritu confessed to the Inspector that she had murdered Akash over a property dispute.
- The confession was written on a paper and signed by Ritu.
- The police could not find any other evidence against Ritu.

Analysis:
- The principle clearly states that confessions made to a Police Officer cannot be proved in court.
- Ritu's confession was made to a Police Officer (Inspector), making it inadmissible as evidence.

Conclusion:
- Therefore, in this case, the confessional statement signed by Ritu cannot be proved in court as per the legal principle. Relying on this statement would violate the established rule of law regarding confessions to Police Officers.
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of t...
The principle clearly states "No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. "Therefore Ritu's confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.
Hence, the correct option is (A).
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The legal system in India is established on the platform of innocent till proven guilty. An unlawful arrest of an individual can be a violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution that states that no human shall be denied of his right to life and personal liberty except if established by law, which means that the process must be fair, clear and not arbitrarily or oppressive.Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution stipulates that no police official can arrest any individual without informing the accused the reason/ground of his detainment/arrest. Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) says that every police official with authority to arrest someone without a warrant must inform the person getting arrested about the crime for which he is arrested and other relevant grounds for the arrest. This is the duty of the police official which he cannot refuse. Section 50A of the CrPC makes it compulsory for the person/police official arresting a person to inform of the arrest to any of his relatives or even friends who may have interest in the same.Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution stipulates that the police official making an arrest must produce the arrested person before the Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest; failing to do so would make him liable for wrongful detention. Section 50(2) of the CrPC provides that the arrested person has the right to get released on bail by making arrangement for the sureties or just inform him of his right when arrested without a warrant for an offence other than a non-cognisable offence.The right to keep quiet does not have any mention in any Indian law; however, its authority can be derived from the CrPC as well as the Indian Evidence Act. The right to stay silent is principally related to the statement and confession made by the accused person in the court. In addition to this, it is the responsibility of the Magistrate to perceive if any statement or confession made by the accused person was voluntarily or was after the use of force and manipulation. Therefore, police or any other authority for that matter is not allowed to compel an accused person to speak anything in the court.Section 41B states that every police official authorised to conduct the investigation/arrest must supply clear, visible and valid badge where the name and designation of the police official is clearly mentioned. Section 41D entitles an arrested person to a right to have one friend or relative or any other person who he wants by his side during his arrest.Q.When a suspect was arrested and brought before a court, he was forced into confessing guilty before the court and was told by the arresting police to either confess now or suffer afterwards. How will the court determine this confession?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no human shall be denied of his right to life and personal liberty except if established by law, which means that the process must be fair, clear and not arbitrarily or oppressive.Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution stipulates that no police official can arrest any individual without informing the accused the reason/ground of his detainment/arrest. Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) says that every police official with authority to arrest someone without a warrant must inform the person getting arrested about the crime for which he is arrested and other relevant grounds for the arrest. This is the duty of the police official which he cannot refuse. Section 50A of the CrPC makes it compulsory for the person/police official arresting a person to inform of the arrest to any of his relatives or even friends who may have interest in the same.Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution stipulates that the police official making an arrest must produce the arrested person before the Magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest; failing to do so would make him liable for wrongful detention. Section 50(2) of the CrPC provides that the arrested person has the right to get released on bail by making arrangement for the sureties or just inform him of his right when arrested without a warrant for an offence other than a non-cognisable offence.The right to keep quiet does not have any mention in any Indian law; however, its authority can be derived from the CrPC as well as the Indian Evidence Act. The right to stay silent is principally related to the statement and confession made by the accused person in the court. In addition to this, it is the responsibility of the Magistrate to perceive if any statement or confession made by the accused person was voluntarily or was after the use of force and manipulation. Therefore, police or any other authority for that matter is not allowed to compel an accused person to speak anything in the court.Section 41B states that every police official authorised to conduct the investigation/arrest must supply clear, visible and valid badge where the name and designation of the police official is clearly mentioned. Section 41D entitles an arrested person to a right to have one friend or relative or any other person who he wants by his side during his arrest.Q. When a suspect was arrested and brought before a court, he was forced into confessing guilty before the court and was told by the arresting police to either confess now or suffer afterwards. How will the court determine this confession?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Statement given by an accused to police under Section 161 of CrPC is not admissible as evidence. In this case, the accused were convicted under Section 302 IPC by the Trial Court and their appeals were dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka. In appeal, the Apex Court bench noted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the so-called confessional statements or voluntary statements given by accused while they were in police custody. As per the police, all the accused were arrested from a school building and formally arrested the next day. They confessed to as many as 24 crimes committed by them. Their confessions of how they planned and executed the murders has been captured on a video, which was also exhibited before the court. The Trial Court had held that these video tapes can also be used as corroborative evidence. This view was upheld by the High Court. Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court went completely wrong in placing reliance on the voluntary statements of the accused and their videography statements. Under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India, an accused cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself. Again, under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; a confessional statement given by an accused before a Police officer is inadmissible as evidence., the bench observed. The court also referred to a recent judgment Venkatesh @ Chandra vs State of Karnataka in which similar observations were made.Q. Toshak was arrested for allegedly committing a crime under Section 272 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon arrest and torture by the police, and knowing that the punishment for such a crime is not much, he confessed before the superintendent of the police that he committed the crime. The confession was not recorded in either documentary or video format but the superintendent presented himself before the court as a witness of the confession made by Toshak. Will Toshak's confession be admissible in the court?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Statement given by an accused to police under Section 161 of CrPC is not admissible as evidence. In this case, the accused were convicted under Section 302 IPC by the Trial Court and their appeals were dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka. In appeal, the Apex Court bench noted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the so-called confessional statements or voluntary statements given by accused while they were in police custody. As per the police, all the accused were arrested from a school building and formally arrested the next day. They confessed to as many as 24 crimes committed by them. Their confessions of how they planned and executed the murders has been captured on a video, which was also exhibited before the court. The Trial Court had held that these video tapes can also be used as corroborative evidence. This view was upheld by the High Court. Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court went completely wrong in placing reliance on the voluntary statements of the accused and their videography statements. Under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India, an accused cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself. Again, under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; a confessional statement given by an accused before a Police officer is inadmissible as evidence., the bench observed. The court also referred to a recent judgment Venkatesh @ Chandra vs State of Karnataka in which similar observations were made.Q. Anand kills Mahesh and enters in his diary that he has killed Mahesh. He then hides the diary and absconds. During a search operation the police finds the diary and now wishes to produce this as evidence of Anand's confession in the court. Can it be admitted in court?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.Statement given by an accused to police under Section 161 of CrPC is not admissible as evidence. In this case, the accused were convicted under Section 302 IPC by the Trial Court and their appeals were dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka. In appeal, the Apex Court bench noted that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the so-called confessional statements or voluntary statements given by accused while they were in police custody. As per the police, all the accused were arrested from a school building and formally arrested the next day. They confessed to as many as 24 crimes committed by them. Their confessions of how they planned and executed the murders has been captured on a video, which was also exhibited before the court. The Trial Court had held that these video tapes can also be used as corroborative evidence. This view was upheld by the High Court. Both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court went completely wrong in placing reliance on the voluntary statements of the accused and their videography statements. Under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution of India, an accused cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself. Again, under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872; a confessional statement given by an accused before a Police officer is inadmissible as evidence., the bench observed. The court also referred to a recent judgment Venkatesh @ Chandra vs State of Karnataka in which similar observations were made.Q. Sobo was arrested by the Delhi police for allegedly committing affray near Rajiv Chowk. During the police custody, upon torture, Sobo wrote a letter wherein he confessed to committing affray and sent the same letter to an influential IAS officer of the area. Would this evidence be admissible in the court?

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Direction: Given legal principles to the facts provided in each of the questions and select the most appropriate answerPrinciple: No confession made to a Police Officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.Facts: Ritu was accused of having murdered Akash over a property dispute. After arrest, Ritu made a confession to the Inspector that she had in fact murdered Akash. The confessional statement of Ritu was written on a paper and Ritu signed the same. The police carried on further investigation but were not able to find any other evidence to produce before the court. Can the confessional statement signed by Ritu be proved in court?a)No, such a confessional statement cannot be proved since the confession was made to a Police Officer.b)Yes, such a confessional statement can be proved since it is not an oral confession. It has been duly signed by Ritu and hence there is no doubt that she made the confession herself.c)Yes, since there is no other evidence, it is necessary to rely on this statement or else a serious offender will escape the clutches of criminal law.d)Both (A) and (C)Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup