Confessions under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 | Civil Law for Judiciary Exams PDF Download

Introduction

• The use of confession as evidence plays a vital role in the legal system. When an accused individual confesses to a crime, it is often seen as a strong indicator of their guilt. However, it is essential to understand that a confession alone is not adequate for a conviction. Let's delve deeper into this concept.
• Confessions, falling under the category of admissions, are significant as they can provide critical insights into a case. For instance, when an accused admits to committing a crime, it can influence the decision-makers in a trial. This acknowledgment of guilt can sway perceptions and impact the outcome of the case.
• Despite the importance of confessions, they are not foolproof. In legal proceedings, it is essential to corroborate confessions with additional evidence to ensure a fair and just trial. This corroborating evidence serves to validate the confession and strengthen the case against the accused.
• Within the legal framework, various sections address the specifics of confessions. Sections 24 to 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and sections 164, 281, and 463 of the Criminal Procedure Code provide the guidelines and procedures regarding the admissibility and treatment of confessions in legal proceedings.

Understanding Confession in Legal Terms

• Confession is a type of admission, as indicated in Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act.
• It is not explicitly defined within the Act but can be explained as an admission made by a person accused of a crime, implying their guilt.

Defining Confession

• According to Mr. Justice Stephen, a confession involves admitting to the crime or suggesting facts that indicate the commission of the offense.
• Lord Atkin in Pakala Narayan Swami v Emperor emphasized that a confession should admit guilt outright or disclose most facts constituting the offense.

Key Points on Confession

• A confession should admit guilt directly or reveal crucial facts of the offense.
• A statement containing some self-exculpatory elements, even if mixed with confessional content, may not be considered a confession.

Illustrative Example

• For instance, if a person admits to being present at the scene of a crime but provides an explanation that would negate their involvement, it may not qualify as a confession.

Difference between Confession and Admission

Case Example: In the case of Sahoo v. the State of U.P., a man's statement "I have finished her" after murdering his daughter-in-law was considered a confession by the court, indicating its confessionary nature.

Forms of Confessions under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

• A confession can take various forms under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• When a confession is made directly to the court, it is termed as a judicial confession.
• If a confession is made to anyone outside the court, it is known as an extra-judicial confession.
• Confession can even include self-conversations that are overheard by others and can be used as evidence.

For instance, in the case of Sahoo v. State of U.P., the accused, who was accused of murdering his daughter-in-law with whom he had frequent disputes, was witnessed leaving the house on the day of the murder. He was heard saying, "I have finished her and with her the daily quarrels." This statement was considered a relevant confession in evidence. It's important to note that a confession doesn't need to be communicated to another person to be considered relevant.

Judicial Confession under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

• Definition of Judicial Confession:
  • A judicial confession refers to statements made before a magistrate or in court as part of legal proceedings.
  • It is essentially a plea of guilt made voluntarily by an individual of sound mind in front of a court.
• Importance of Judicial Confession:
  • Provides valuable evidence in legal proceedings.
  • Can significantly impact the outcome of a case.
• Conditions for Valid Judicial Confession:
  • Must be made freely without any coercion.
  • The person confessing should be in a fit mental state.
  • Given during the course of legal proceedings.
• Examples of Judicial Confession:
  • An accused admitting to a crime in court.
  • A defendant pleading guilty before a magistrate.

Understanding Extra-judicial Confessions

• Extra-judicial confessions, as per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, are confessions made by the accused outside the presence of a magistrate or in court.
• These confessions do not need to be directed towards a specific individual and can take various forms, such as a prayer or a private conversation.
• An extra-judicial confession is defined as a voluntary admission of guilt by the accused in a conversation with individuals other than a judge or magistrate handling the case.
• For example, a person may confess to a friend or relative through a letter expressing remorse for their actions, which can be considered as an extra-judicial confession.
• Extra-judicial confessions can be admissible in court and serve as a basis for conviction if they are deemed credible.
• These confessions are typically made before private individuals, including judicial officers in their personal capacity or magistrates who are not authorized to record confessions under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.).

Judicial Confession vs Extra-judicial Confession

Examples and Court Guidelines:

• For instance, in the case of State of Punjab v. Bhagwan Singh, the Supreme Court emphasized that the value of an extra-judicial confession increases when it is consistent and convincing. Without this, an accused cannot be convicted based solely on their confession.
• In another case, Balwinder Singh v. State, the Supreme Court outlined guidelines stating that the court must assess the credibility of the person making an extra-judicial confession. The court should scrutinize all statements to determine the trustworthiness of the confessor.
• In Sahadevan v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court established principles for admitting confessions. These principles include considering that extra-judicial confessions are weak evidence, must be voluntary and truthful, gain strength when supported by other evidence, and must prove the guilt of the confessor like any other fact in a legal proceeding.

Voluntary and Non-voluntary Confession

• A confession by an accused can be categorized as Voluntary and non-voluntary.
• Confession to a police officer while in their custody is never admissible under Section 25 and 26.
• Extra-judicial confessions and confessions made to a magistrate during investigation are admissible only if made voluntarily.
• If a confession seems to be influenced by inducement, threat, or promise from a person in authority, it is considered irrelevant.

Section 24 of Indian Evidence Act

• Confessions caused by inducement, threat, or promise are deemed irrelevant in criminal proceedings.
• Confessions influenced by factors leading the accused to believe they would gain benefits or avoid harm are inadmissible.

Confessions by Co-accused

• The Supreme Court ruling in the Pancho v. State of Haryana case emphasized that confessions made by co-accused individuals lack significant evidentiary value.
• These confessions are not deemed as primary evidence and are only considered valuable for supporting or corroborating conclusions derived from other substantial evidence.
• Co-accused confessions cannot independently establish guilt or innocence but can supplement the overall body of evidence in a case.
• It is essential to rely on concrete and reliable evidence beyond co-accused confessions to ascertain the truth and reach just conclusions.

Conclusion

• The confession in criminal law is a significant aspect, forming part of admission provisions in the evidence act. When a confession is deemed true and admissible in court, it serves as compelling evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
• Sections 24 to 30 of the Evidence Act extensively cover various facets of confession, ensuring legal safeguards for the accused and upholding their constitutional rights, as outlined in Article 20(3).
• For a confession to be admissible, it must be free from any form of threat or inducement. Any confession made under police custody is not considered, aiming to prevent coercion and torture by law enforcement.
• The provisions within both the Evidence Act and the Criminal Procedure Code are designed to protect the rights of the accused and maintain the integrity of the legal process.