Confession is a statement or admission made by accused person that he committed the offence.
What relation between Confession and Admission?
Confession is a part of admission and it lies into the admission. In General the statement given by person existence or non existence fact is admission.
While this general statement committed by accused in criminal proceeding in which he committing the offence done by him.
So that particular commitment of statement of offence became confession. Admission is a big part and confession is smaller piece into it.
Meaning of confession
Confession is an admission made by a person accused of an offence suggesting and inference that he has committed the offence.
All confession are admission but all admission are not confession.
Confession section 24 of Evidence Act
Confession caused by inducement, threats or promis it will be irrelevant if for following condition are fulfilled.
- Statement is a confession obtained by induced , threat or promise.
- It is made by an accused.
- It is made to person in authority.
- Person makes confession to gain any advantage or avoid any Evil in reference to proceeding against him.
Person in authority in confession section 24 Evidence Act
Person in authority are Judges Magistrate Police officer etc. means who has power to induce the charge.
It also includes the Clerk, Judges wife etc.
Confession to police not to be proved section 25 Evidence Act
Confession made by accused before the police officer weather it is relevant or irrelevant this section 25 Talk about.
Person who is an accused and he made a confession statement then that confession will be in admitted means not be admitted.
What the principal behind confession to police officer not to be proved
The principal behind these two avoid the police custodial torture to extort confession from the accused.
Who is police officer?
- Power to make investigation.
- Power to file a report against criminal and have him presented.
Abdul Rashid v. State of Bihar 2001 SC.
Confession to supritendent of exercise under Bihar and Orissa Exercise Act was held in admission.
Only confessional statement is excluded, if a person giving non confessional statement means giving general statement before the police officer is admissible.
What is confessional FIR?
Confession FIR nothing but the accused himself before the police officer in police station registered the FIR against himself.
The portion/ piece of confessional statement by accused excluded and rest part of which is nonconventional statement is admissible and it will be relevant.
Who is accused?
Accused may be anyone who has committed the offence it is not necessary that participation from the beginning means at the beginning of the case he was not accused but after investigation he brought into as accused.
Here the statement which he stated before the police officer at the beginning when he was not accused.
Then after he became as accused than the statement given by him will come under this 25 section because it became the part of confession.
Section 26 of Indian Evidence Act
This section 26 of Evidence Act talk about confusion made in police custody and eat could not be proved as per section 26.
Except in the presence before the magistrate and absence of police.
This section 26 talk about that confusion in police custody not to be proved.
Police custody
Under control of police Actual or Constructive( effective control and supervision). Means control of police officer.
Confession given to them not be proved against accused.
- Confession may to anyone in police custody is it admission except to Magistrate.
- The Confession to doctor while is standing outside.
- Confession to driver when police is not inside car.
Example: police officer arrested the accused and at between the way to police station, police had its another work to do.
Police kept that accused under the villager and Sarpanch supervision and when police went to their another work.
Between the period time of absence of police the accused made it confession to Sarpanch.
Although the police officer was absent but he hold the constructive position their, this confusion became inadmissible under section 26.
Indian Evidence Act Section 27
This section 27 of Evidence Act talk about how much information receive from accused maybe proved, this section also the exception of section 24-26.
- Person is accused of an offence and in police custody.
- Accused
- He makes confessional or non confessional statement.
- Disclosure Statement
- In such statement a hi discloses about the place of hiding of object related to offence.
- Proved
- The object is discovered from place of hiding discovery statement admissible under 27.
What is admissible under 27 of Indian Evidence Act
What may be admissible under 27 can be understood by studying following cases.
Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar 1966 SC
Supreme Court held that the statement that the accused had committed the offence or that he had hidden the object at some place are not admissible what is admission is only the portion of the statement that reveal the information about the place of the hiding of the object.
Mohd. Inaytullah v. State of Maharashtra 1976 SC
Supreme Court held that it is essential to prove that the object was discovered from a place of hiding if object laying in an open place.
There are chance that other mens no about and it will be difficult to prove that object was discovered at instant of information provided by accused.
Exclusive information shall be only from accused disclosure statement , only then his Discovery statement is admissible under 27.
Panduranga kallu patel v. State of Maharashtra
In this case of Panduranga kallu patel v. State of Maharashtra Supreme Court held that section 27 is an exception to Section 25 and 26 of Evidence Act.
Deoman Upadhyay v. State of Up
In this case Deoman Upadhyay v. state of Uttar Pradesh constitutional validity of section 27 was Upheld.
Section 28 of Indian Evidence Act
The section 28 talk about confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, thread or promise.
section 28 is an exception to Section 24 it provides that confession made after the removal of impression caused by inducement, threats or promise is relevant.
Indian Evidence Act Section 29
This section 29 of Indians act talk about confession will not become a relevant when if it is obtained under the following circumstances.
- a promise of secrecy
- inconsequence of deception practiced on accused.
- when accused was drunk.
- in answer to question he should not have answered.
- want of warning to the accused that he was not bound to make the statement.
Section 30 confession of co- accused Evidence Act
If co- accused make a confession and he implicate himself as well as the other co-acused what would be essential to admission of it.
Essential are :- two or more person one tried jointly (section 22 Crpc).
- They are tried for same office.
- Confession is made by co accused implicating himself and other accused.
- Confession is only proved against the maker.
Example:- A committed that he done an offence along with B , here B does not said anything.
In this the confession made by A duly Proved against A, then here B also may be liable because A had made Confession himself and against B also.
The main focus is that while making confession A had taken the name of B and which was duly proved.
Kashmira shah v. State of Mp 1952 SC.
It was held that Confession of co- accused made under Section 30 implicating himself and the other co-acused is a substantive piece of evidence against the other co-acused.
However it’s evidentiary value is very weak and convection cannot be based solely on it.
It can be used for the purpose of corroboration and for the purpose of feeling the missing link so as to give the court that extra assurance regarding the decision it has arrived at.
Confession when relevant
- When it’s not made to police
- When it’s made in police custody but in immediate presence of magistrate.
- When statement leads to discovery of fact under section 27.