Vnb SEMINAR

ARMY INSTITUE OF LAW

ADMISSIONS UNDER THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT

Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for BA.LL.B. degree

Submitted By:
Tulip Joshi
Section- A
1405

1
 INDEX
Sno. TOPIC Pg.
1 Introduction 3
2 Admission Is a Positive Acknowledgement 4
3 What Is The Importance Of Admission as 5
Evidence?

4 Admission on Question of Law 6

5 Admissions by Agents 6
6 Admission by a Stranger. 7

7 Condition for Proof of Admission 8

8 When oral admissions as to the contents of 11

documents are relevant
9 Admission in Civil cases “without prejudice”- 12
Section 23

10 CONFESSION- 12
 Confession and admission
 Evidentiary value of confession
 Confession to police
 Confession on promise of secrecy.
 Consideration Of Proved Confession
Affecting Person Making It And Others
Jointly Under Trial For The Same Offence
11 Conclusion 19
12 Bibliography 20

2
 ADMISSIONS UNDER THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT

INTRODUCTION

Admission plays a very important part in judicial proceedings. In English Law, the term
‘admission’ is used in civil cases while ‘confession’ is used in criminal cases.1

Admission has been dealt with in Section 17 to 23. The Sections 24 to 30 are devoted to
confession. An admission is a statement, oral or documentary, or contained in electronic form2,
which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any
of the persons and under the circumstances hereinafter mentioned. 3

1. A party to the proceeding.(Section 18)

2. An agent to any party whom the court regards under the circumstances of the case, as
expressly or impliedly authorised by him (the party) to make them.(Section 18)
3. Parties to suit, suing or being suit in representative capacity if the party making
representative statement held that representative capacity while making the statement.
Example- trustee, executor, administrator or the like .(Section 18).
4. Persons who have proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the
proceeding and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested and
also if the statements are made during the continuance of the interest of the person
making the statements.(Section 18)
5. Persons from whom parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject- matter
of the suit, if the statements are made during the continuance of the interest of the person
making the statement.(Section 18)
6. Person whose position and liability it is necessary to prove as against any party to the
suit, if such statements would be relevant as against such persons making the statement
in relation to such position or liability in a suit brought by or against them and if such
statements are made while the person making them occupies such liability (Section 19).
7. Person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference
to a matter in dispute (Section 20).

1
Admissions, INDIAN LAW PRIMER, ( Aug 5, 2017), http://indialegal.blogspot.in/2008/04/admissions.html.
2
Subs. By Infornmation Technology Act, 2000 (Act No. 21 of 2000), S. 92 and Sch. II.
3
Section 17, Indian Evidence Act 1872.

3
Admissions are broadly classified into two categories: (a) judicial admissions, and (b) extra-
judicial admissions. Judicial admissions are formal admissions made by a party to the
proceeding in the case. Extra-judicial admissions are informal admissions not appearing on the
record of the case. Judicial admissions, being made in the case, are fully binding on the party
who makes them. They constitute a waiver of proof. They can be made the foundation of the
rights of the parties.4

Extra-judicial admissions are also binding on the party against whom they are set up. Unlike
judicial admissions, they are binding only partially and not fully, except in cases where they
operate as or have the effect of estoppel, in which case, they are fully binding, and may
constitute the foundation of the rights of the parties.5

In a case decided by the Supreme Court, the Plaintiff sought to rely on an admission made by
the Defendant in the plaint in an earlier suit filed by the Defendant. It was held that Section 17
of the Evidence Act makes no distinction between an admission made by a party in his pleading
and other admissions. Therefore, an admission made by a person in a plaint signed and verified
by him may be used as evidence against him in other suits. Of course, the admission cannot be
regarded as conclusive, and it is open to the party concerned to show that the statement is not
true.6It is generally immaterial to whom an admission is made. An admission made to a stranger
is also relevant. Admissions are as much binding on the Government as on ordinary persons.7

ADMISSION IS A POSITIVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-

Admission is conscious and deliberate act not something which would be inferred. A party by
voluntary acknowledgement of the existence of certain facts during the judicial or quasi-
judicial proceedings can concede as true or valid the allegation made in proceeding or notice.th
e formal act of acknowledgement during the proceeding dispenses with the production of
evidence by conceding for the purpose of litigation that the proposition alleged by the opponent
is true.no acknowledgement or implied admission can be inferred from silence or no implied
admission can be inferred from silence, inaction or failure to act. Merely because an admission
has not been denied it cannot be admitted to be established. The omission to answer the notice

4
Asamaya Roy, What is Admission under Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, SHAREYOURESSAYS, (Aug 5,
2017), http://www.shareyouressays.com/119232/what-is-admission-under-section-17-of-indian-evidence-act
5
Ajodhya Prasad V. Bhawani Shanker, A.I.R. 1957 All. 1 F.B..
6
Basant Singh v. Janki Singh, A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 341
7
Ibid at 4.

4
cannot itself be treated as evidence of truth of the statement made in the notice. The allegation
can be said to be proved only when there is conscious and deliberate admission in express
terms.8

The statement of person making admission should be read completely and statement drawn
from reference cannot form admission.9the admission of a party will be admitted against him
and to make his statement admissible, it is not necessary that attention of that person should be
brough to the said fact.10Admission is a prior statement averse to ones interestand not a prior
statement in ones interest.11

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF ADMISSION AS EVIDENCE?

An admission by a party is substantive evidence if it fulfils the requirements of Section 21 of

the evidence act. They are however not conclusive proof of the matters admitted. There is no
necessary requirement of the statement containing the admission having to be put to the party
because it is evidence proprio vigour. 12

Admissions duly proved are admissible evidence irrespective of whether the party making them
appeared in witness box or not and whether that party when appearing as witness was
confronted with those statements in case it made a statement contrary to those admissions.13

Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act as a general rule, lays down that, admissions are
relevant, and may be proved against the person who makes them or his representative in
interest, and if duly proved, though not conclusive, are sufficient evidence of the facts
submitted. An admission is not conclusive unless it amounts to estoppal. The person against
whom an admission is proved is at a liberty to show that it was mistaken or untrue. When an
admission is duly proved, and the person against whom it is proved does not satisfy the Court

8
Mukesh Kumar Ajmera v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 Raj. 250.
9
Dharamvati Bai v. Shiv Singh AIR 1991 MP 18.
10
Maimuna Bibi v. Rasool Mian, AIR 1991 Pat 203.
11
Satrucharla Vijaya Raju v. Nimmaka Jaya Raji, (2006) 1 SCC 212.
12
Bishwanath Prasad v. Dwarka Prasad, AIR 1974 SC 117.
13
Bhogilal Chunilal Pandya v. State of Bombay, AIR 1959 SC 356.

5
that it was mistaken or untrue, the Court may decide in accordance with such admission. A
false admission does not bind that person making such admission.14

ADMISSION ON QUESTION OF LAW

Admission on a pure question of law is not binding on the maker. An admission on a point of
law is not an admission of a “thing” so as to make it a matter of estoppel. Under English law
admission of law is relevant15. Under the designation “Parties” the law includes not only those
who appear on the record in that capacity, but also other persons who are interested in the
subject- matter of the suit are considered by law as real parties. Their admissions have same
weight as those of parties on record. A party on record who has no beneficial interest in the
issue of litigation will not be permitted to effect by his admission the substantive right of one
for whom he is acting. Example-in a suit brought by a guardian for a minor the statement of
guarding will not be an admission against the minor.16

ADMISSIONS BY AGENTS-

The principal constitutes the agent as his representative in the transaction of certain business.
Therefore whatever the agent does, in the lawful transaction of that business, is the act of the
principal. The fact of agency must be proved before the admissions of the agent are received
in the evidence. The agent must be authorised to make the statement. Also the statement must
be made during continuance of the agency. By termination of the agency the authority to make
admissions ceases. According to the Indian Evidence Act, admissions of an agent is admissible
against the principle if made with his authority but the confession of the agent is not so
admissible. But in a criminal trial, if it is to bind a principal by the statement of his agent, the
relation of master servant must be strictly proved.17

If client appoints a pleader, Attorney or counsel and gives him full authority to conduct his
case and give him full information about facts, then the admission make by such a counsel
under his signature without some serious mistake is conclusively binding on the client and

14
Indian Evidence Act,1872- Admissions- Meaning, definition & Evidentiary value, LAWN.COM, (August 7,
2017), http://lawnn.com/indian-evidence-act1872-admissions-meaning-definition-evidentiary/.
15
Jagwant Singh v. Sitan Singh, ILR 21 All 285.
16
BATUK LAL, THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, 179 (21st ed, 2015).
17
Rit Varma v. Emproper, 19 Cr LJ 789.

6
cannot be afterwards withdrawn. The law makes no provision for admission by a counsel in a
criminal case. No admission by counsel can relieve the prosecution of the duty to prove the
case.18But when the counsel of the accused appears as witness to prove some fats the above
principle does not apply. In the case of Ragunath v.State of U.P19 The sworn testimony of the
counsel was held to be relevant.

Where several persona are jointly interested in the subject- matter of the suit, the general
rule is that the admission of any one of these persons are receivable against himself and fellows,
whether they all be jointly suing or sued, or whether an action be brought in favour of or against
any one or more of them separately, provided that the admissions relate to such subject-
matter.The existence of joint interest which is disputed cannot be established by the admission
of one of the parties sought to be charged but this fact must be established by independent
proof.A statement of co- party while usable against himself cannot be used against a co-party.

Persons from whom parties derive interest-The statement of one person is binding upon the
other if the latter derives his title through the former.20A admits in judicial proceeding that his
deceased brother’s widow adopted C and C was entitled to the property left by his brother.
After the death of the widow of A’s brother A’s son filed a suit for declaration that their uncle
died leaving no son and that they were the reversioners. At the trial C tried to prove the
admission of A. it was held in admissible since they claim in their own right and not through
their father.21When two parties are litigating, the statements of any one of them made prior to
the litigation may be proved at the trial if it amount to admission.

ADMISSION BY A STRANGER.

Ordinarily statements by strangers to a suit or proceeding are not relevant as against the parties.
But in some cases admission of strangers are considered relevant. When in a suit a party to it
in order to achieve success in the litigation, has to prove the position of liability of a stranger
to the proceeding, the statement of the stranger would be relevant against a party to the
proceeding as admission, if the statement is of such a nature that if a suit is brought against him
in relation to that position it would be relevant provided that when the statement was made, the

18
S.C Miter v. State, AIR 1950 Cal 435.
19
AIR 1973 SC 1100.
20
BATUK LAL, THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, 182 (21st ed, 2015).
21
Gopal Singh v. Hukum Singh, AIR 1950 All 644.

7
person making statement occupies such position or subject to such liability about which the
statement was made. Under Section 19 the party to a suit can use the statement of even a third
party, if the statement of that third person contained an admission against the interest of that
third person and could have been used against the third person if he sues or was sued in
connection with a matter involving the position or liability affected by that admission.

Section 20 deals with another class of admission of persons other than the parties when a party
refers to a third person for some information or an opinion on the matter in dispute, the
statement made by third person are receivable as admissions against the person referring,. The
reason is that when a party refers to another person for statement of his view, he approves of
his statement in anticipation and adopt as his own. Such declaration shall only be admissible if
it relates strictly to the subject- matter in relation to which the reference was made. Thus, where
a defendant stated that a book keeper would furnish whatever information was contained in the
book and the book keeper instead stated that in his opinion certain entries in the book were
false, it was held inadmissible because the matter referred was that what the entry was and not
whether they were correct or incorrect. The report of the munsif is admissible in evidence is
held to be admission of the parties under S-20 when the parties made a joint application to the
effect that Munsif may decide the suit after he has made local inspection.22 Section 20 is the
second exception to the general rule laid down in Section-18.23

CONDITION FOR PROOF OF ADMISSION

Section 21- Proof of admissions against persons, making them, and by or on their behalf.

This section lays down that an admission may be used against a person who makes them or his
representatives in interest but generally cannot be used by the persons who makes it for his
own use except in the following cases:

 An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it is of such
nature that, if the person making it were dead it would be relevant as between third
person under S-32.
Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who
cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance
cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the

22
Jumman Singh and Ors.V. Sheo Darshan Singh, 52 All 235.
23
Ibid at 14

8
 circumstances of the case, appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant
facts in the following cases:--
(1) When it relates to cause of death.-
(2) When the statement was made by such person in the ordinary course of business,
and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books
kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty; or of
an acknowledgment written or signed by him of the receipt of money, goods, securities
or property of any kind; or of a document used in commerce written or signed by him;
or of the date of a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him.
(3) When the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person
making it, or when, if true, it would expose him or would have exposed him to a
criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages.
(4) or gives opinion as to public right or custom, or matters of general interest;
(5) When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship 1*[by blood,
marriage or adoption] between persons as to whose relationship 1*[by blood, marriage
or adoption] the person making the statement had special means of knowledge, and
when the statement was made before the question in dispute was raised.
(6) or is made in will or deed relating to family affairs;
(7) When the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document which relates
to any such transaction as is mentioned in section 13, clause (a).
(8) When the statement was made by a number of persons, and expressed feelings or
impressions on their part relevant to the matter in question.
 An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it consists
of a statement of existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in issue, made at
or about the time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by
conduct rendering its falsehood improbable.
Eg: A executes a deed of gift in favour of B. A year later A files for cancellation of the
deed with the allegation that at the time of execution he was ill and could not understand
the contents of the deed. A had written a letter to C a day before the execution of the
deed alleging that he was losing the balance of mind. This letter was allowed to be
proved by A because it was made at the time when the state of mind and body existed
and also the subsequent conduct of A in getting advice of the doctor rendered its
falsehood improbable.

9
Illustrations-
(a) The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed is or is not forged. A affirms that
it is genuine, B that it is forged. A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B
may prove a statement by A that deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself
that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged.
(b) A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. Evidence is given to show that the
ship was taken out of her proper course. A produces a book kept by him in the
ordinary course of his business showing observations alleged to have been taken by him
from day to day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may
prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were
dead, under section 32, clause (2).

(c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta. He produces a letter written by

himself and dated at Lahore on that day, and bearing the Lahore post-mark of that day. The
statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be admissible
under section 32, clause (2).

(d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that
he refused to sell them below their value. A may prove these statements, though they are
admissions, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.

(e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit coin which he knew to be
counterfeit. He offers to prove that he asked a skillful person to examine the coin as he doubted
whether it was counterfeit or not, and that that person did examine it and told him it was
genuine. A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last preceding illustration.

 An admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, if it is relevant

otherwise than as an admission. The last exception allows a person to prove his own
statement when it is otherwise relevant under any of the provisions relating to
relevancy. There are many cases in which a statement is relevant not because it is an
admission but because it establishes the existence or non-existence of a relevant fact or
a fact in issue. In all such cases a party can prove his own statements. These cases are
covered by the following sections –
Section 6 - When a statement is made relevant by the doctrine of res gestae i.e. due to
part of the same transaction. For example, immediately after a road accident, if the

10
 victim has made a statement to the rescuer about the cause of the accident, he can prove
that statement because it is part of the same transaction.
Section 8 - A statement may be proved by or on behalf of the person make it under
Section 8 if it accompanies or explains acts other than statements or if it influences the
conduct of a person whose conduct is relevant. For example, where A says to B, "You
have not paid my money back", and B walks away in silence, A may prove his own
statement because it has influenced the conduct of a person whose conduct is relevant.

Section 14 - When the statement explains his state of mid or body or bodily feeling
when any such thing is relevant or is in issue, it can be proved by himself. For example,
where the question is whether a person has been guilty of cruelty towards his wife, he
may prove his statements made shortly before or after the alleged cruelty which explain
his love and affection for and his feeling towards his wife.24

When oral admissions as to the contents of documents are relevant. Under section 22 it has
been laid down that when there has been a document, nobody can be allowed to prove oral
admission about the contents of that document Example- A executed a mortgage deed in favour
of B. B files a suit for the possession of the property mortgaged on the basis of it. A denies the
execution of the deed. B cannot prove the execution of the mortgage deed by oral evidence that
he had before someone admitted that he had mortgaged that property.

There are two exceptions to this rule-

1. When a person is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of some documents
he will be entitled to rely on oral admission
2. Under Section 65 secondary evidence of the contents of a document can be given when
original document is lost or when it is in the possession of the opposite party and so on.

Original admissions as too the contents of electronic records are not relevant, unless the
genuineness of the electronic record produced is in question25in civil cases no admission is
relevant if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or

24
What do you understand by Admission? ,HANUMANT, (Aug 6, 2017), http://hanumant.com/LOE-Unit4-
Admission.html
25
Section 22-A, Indian Evidence Act 1872.

11
under circumstances from which the court can infer that the parties agreed together that
evidence of it should not be given.

Explanation- nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any barrister, pleader, attorney or
vakil from giving evidence of any matter of whih he may be compelled to give evidence under
Section 126.

Admission in Civil cases “without prejudice”26

It lays down that in civil cases if a person admits the liability upon an express condition that
evidence of such admission should not be given or if it is made in such circumstances that the
court can infer that there was some sort of agreement that the admission will not be proved in
evidence in a case, such evidence shall not b relevant and will not be allowed to be proved. If
such statements are allowed to be proved in court, it will be impossible for people to talk of
compromise. The usual way by which the person making the admission secures the privilege
is by stipulating that the communications are without prejudice27. In order to sustain the plea
of privilege it must be shown that both the addressor and addressee intended to claim the
same.28

CONFESSIONS

Confessions are merely one species of admission. It is not defined in the Act. Mr. Justice
Stephen in his Digest of the law of Evidence defines confession as “confession is an admission
made at any time by a person charged with a crime stating or suggesting the inference that he
committed that crime.” In Pakala Narayan Swami v Emperor29 Lord Atkin observed “ A
confession must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which
constitute the offence. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact, even a conclusively
incriminating fact is not in itself a confession.

Admission and Confession .

Confession Admission

1. Confession is a statement made by an 1. Admission usually relates to civil transaction and

accused person which is sought to be proved comprises all statements amounting to admission

26
Section 23, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
27
BATUK LAL, THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, 190 (21st ed, 2015).
28
Luchnow Improvement Trust v. P.L. Jaitley, AIR 1930 Oudh 105.
29
(1939) 41 BOMLR 428.

12
against him in criminal proceeding to defined under section 17 and made by person
establish the commission of an offence by mentioned under section 18, 19 and 20.
him.

2. Confession if deliberately and voluntarily

2. Admissions are not conclusive as to the matters
made may be accepted as conclusive of the
admitted it may operate as an estoppel.
matters confessed.

3. Admissions may be used on behalf of the person

3. Confessions always go against the person
making it under the exception of section 21 of
making it
evidence act.

4.Confessions made by one or two or more

accused jointly tried for the same offence can 4. Admission by one of the several defendants in suit
be taken into consideration against the co- is no evidence against other defendants.
accused (section 30)

5. admission is statement oral or written which gives

5. confession is statement written or oral
inference about the liability of person making
which is direct admission of suit.
admission.30

Evidentiary value of confession

Judicial confession- Are those which are made before a magistrate or in court in the due course
of legal proceedings. A case where there is no proof of corpus delicti must be distinguished
from another where that is proved. In the absence of the corpus delicti a confession alone may
not suffice to justify conviction.31Now the settled law If corroboration is needed it is enough
that the general trend of the confession is substantiated by some evidence which would tally
with the contents of the confession. General corroboration is enough.

Extra-judicial confessions- Are those which are made by the accused elsewhere than before a
magistrate or in court. It is not necessary that the statements should have been addressed to any

30
Shraddha Chaudhri, Confession Under Indian Evidence Act, LEGALSERVICESINDIA, (August 6, 2015),
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/confession-under-indian-evidence-act-1547-1.html
31
Birey Singh v. State of M.P, AIR 1952 SC 1096.

13
definite individual. It may have taken place in the form of a prayer. It may be a confession to a
private person. It also includes a magistrate not empowered to record confessions under section
164 of the Cr.P.C. or a magistrate so empowered but receiving the confession at a stage when
section 164 does not apply.

Extra-judicial confession can be accepted and can be the basis of a conviction if it passes the
test of credibility. The court has to decide whether the person before whom the admission is
said to have been made are trustworthy witnesses. The extra-judicial confession is open to the
danger of mistake due to the misapprehension of the witness before whom the confession was
made to the misuse of the words and the failure of the party to express his own meaning. There
being no record and there being no sanction behind it is very easy for the prosecution to catch
hold of any witness who may come and depose that the accused admitted his guilt in his
presence on some particular time. Such a confession must be proved by an independent or
satisfactory evidence.

Voluntary and non-voluntary confession- A confession to the police officer is the confession
made by the accused while in the custody of a police officer and never relevant and can never
be proved under Section 25 and 26. 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.

Section 24 of Indian Evidence Act - confession caused by inducement, threat or promise,

when irrelevant in criminal proceeding- A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant
in a criminal proceeding, 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 temporal nature in reference to the
proceeding against him. If a confession comes within the four corners of Section 24 is
irrelevant.32

32
What do you understand by Admission? ,HANUMANT, (Aug 6, 2017), http://hanumant.com/LOE-Unit4-
Admission.html.

14
An inducement may be express or implied, it need not be made to the accused directly from
the person in authority. The real enquiry is whether there had been any threat of such a nature
that from fear of it the prisoner was likely to have told an untruth.33

Pyare Lal v. State of Rajasthan34 . If a friend of the accused induces him to make a confession
this statement will not be excluded by Section 24 as the threat, inducement or promise do not
emanate from a person in authority.

The term “person in authority” within the meaning of Section 24 was held to be one who has
authority to interfere in the matter charge against the accused. A house surgeon is a person in
authority in relation to nurse of the same hospital. The expression, “whatever you say will be
used as evidence against you” will not exclude a confession.

In State of Karnataka v. A.B.Nag Raj35 there was allegation that the deceased girl was killed
by her father and step-mother in the National park. It was alleged that the accused made
confession to a witness who was the widow of one of the conspirators and was helping her
husband in making spears and other weapons. It was held that the confession was not reliable.

Value of retracted confession- A retracted confession is a statement made by an accused

person before the trial begins by which he admits to have committed the offence but which he
repudiates at the trial.If during the investigation, the accused is willing to admit the guilt the
police officer sends the accused to some magistrate for recording his statement. The magistrate
after being satisfied that the accused admits in his statement to have committed the offence,
this recorded statement by the magistrate may be proved at the trial. When the trial begins He
may deny to have made the statement at all or he may say that he made that statement due to
undue influence of the police. In this case the confession made by the accused to the magistrate
before the trial begins is called retracted confession.36

It is unsafe to base the conviction on a retracted confession unless it is corroborated by

trustworthy evidence. There is no definite law that a retracted confession cannot be the basis

33
Asamaya Roy, What is Admission under Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, SHAREYOURESSAYS, (Aug 5,
2017), http://www.shareyouressays.com/119232/what-is-admission-under-section-17-of-indian-evidence-act
34
AIR 1963 SC 1094.
35
Appeal (crl.) 60 of 1995.
36
Admissions: who can make admissions, SNDLAW, (Aug 7, 2017),
http://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/04/admission-and-who-can-make-admissions.html

15
of the conviction but it has been laid down as a rule of practice and prudence not to rely on
retracted confession unless corroborated.

Proof of judicial confession- Under Section 80 of Evidence Act a confession recorded by the
magistrate according to law shall be presumed to be genuine. It is enough if the recorded
judicial confession is filed before the court. It is not necessary to examine the magistrate who
recorded it to prove the confession. But the identity of the accused has to be proved.

Proof of extra-judicial confession- extra-judicial confession may be in writing or oral. In the

case of a written confession the writing itself will be the best evidence but if it is not available
or is lost the person before whom the confession was made be produced to depose that the
accused made the statement before him. When the confession has not been recorded, person or
persons before whom the accused made the statement should be produced before the court and
they should prove the statement made by the accused.

Confession to police

confession to police officer not to be proved.37 No confession made to a police officer shall
be proved as against a person accused of any offence. If confessions to police were allowed to
be proved in evidence, the police would torture the accused and thus force him to confess to a
crime which he might not have a committed.

The mere presence of the policeman should not have this effect.This principle of exclusion
applies only to statement which amount to a confession. A confessional statement made by a
person to the police even before he is accused of any offence is equally irrelevant. Only that
part of a confessional First Information Report is admissible which does not amount to a
confession or which comes under the scope of Section 27.

Confession By Accused While In Custody Of Police Not To Be Proved Against Him.38

Confession Of An Accused In Polilice Custody To Any One Else-Section 26 provides that

a confession which is made in custody of a police officer cannot be proved against him. Unless
it is made before a magistrate.

37
Section 25, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
38
Section 26, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

16
In Kishore Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh39, the extra judicial confession was made to
Pradhan who was accompanied by Police (enquiry) Officer. The only interference which could
be drawn from the circumstance of the case, is that the confession was made at the time when
the accused was in the custody of police and it could not be proved against the accused.

A policeman may even touch a person but may keep such a control over him that the person so
controlled cannot go any way he likes. His movement is in the control of the police officer.
Thus it is settled that “the custody of a police officer for the purpose of section 26, Evidence
Act, is no mere physical custody.”

In R. v. Lester40, the accused was being taken in a tonga by a police constable. In the absence
of constable, the accused confessed to the tanga-driver that he committed the crime. The
confession was held to be in police custody as the accused was in the custody of constable and
it made no difference of his temporary absence. But where the accused is not arrested nor is he
under supervision and is merely invited to explain certain circumstances, it would be going
further that the section warrants to exclude the statement that he makes on the grounds that he
is deemed to be in police custody.

How Much Of Information Received From Accused May Be Proved41:

This section of the act is founded on the principle that if the confession of the accused is
supported by the discovery of a fact then it may be presumed to be true and not to have been
extracted. It comes into operation only-

 If and when certain facts are deposed to as discovered in consequence of information

received from an accused person in police custody, and
 If the information relates distinctly to the fact discovered.
But clearly the extent of the information admissible must depend on the exact nature of
the fact discovered to which such information is required to relate.
In Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar,42 it is the discovery and the seizure of
articles used in wrapping the dead body and the pieces of Sari belonging to the deceased
was made at the instance of one accused. Articles discovered were duly identified by

39
AIR 1990 SC 2140.
40
ILR (1895) 20 Bom 165.
41
Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
42
AIR 1994 SC 2420

17
the witness. It was held that in these circumstances, failure of Investigating Officer to
record the disclosure of statement was not fatal
Section 28- Confession Made After Removal Of Impression Caused By
Inducement, Threat Or Promise, Relevant:
If such a confession as is referred to in section 24 is made after the impression caused
by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the court, been fully
removed, it is relevant. It must be borne in mind that there must be strong and cogent
evidence that the influence of the inducement has really ceased.
Impression produced by promise or threat may be removed
• By lapse of time, or
• By an intervening caution giving by some person of superior authority to the person
holding out the inducement, where a prisoner confessed some months after the promise
and after the warning his confession was received.

Section 29-Confession Otherwise Relevant Not To Become Irrelevant Because Of

Promise Of Secrecy, Etc.:
In such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because
it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of deception practiced on
the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it
was made in answer to question which he need not have answered, whatever may have
been the form of those questions, because he was not warned that he was not bound to
make such confession, and that evidence if it might be given against him.

Confession on promise of secrecy, etc- Section 29 lays down that if a confession is

relevant, that is, if it is not excluded from being proved by any other provision on Indian
Evidence Act, it cannot be irrelevant if it was taken from the accused by:
1. Giving him promise of secrecy, or
2. By deceiving him, or
3. When he was drunk, or
4. Because it wasn’t made clear in answer to question which he need not have answered,
or because no warning was given that he was not bound to say anything and that
whatever he will state will be used against him.
When a statement is made voluntarily without inducement, threat or promise from a
man in authority; and when it is not made to a police officer, it is admissible

18
 notwithstanding the fact that the person who took the confessional statement did not
warn the accused that he was bound to make the statement and if he did so, it may be
used in evidence against him and upon that he may be convicted.43

Section 30- Consideration Of Proved Confession Affecting Person Making It And

Others Jointly Under Trial For The Same Offence-
When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence and a
confession made by one such persons affecting himself and some other such persons is
proved, the court may take into consideration such confession as against such other
person as well as against the person who makes such confession.
It appears to be very strange that the confession of one person is to be taken into
consideration against another. Where the confession of one accused is proved at the
trial, the other accused persons have no other opportunity to cross examine him. It is
opposed to the principle of jurisprudence to use a statement against a person without
giving him the opportunity to cross examine the person making the statement.

CONCLUSION

Change in the Evidence Act is necessary so as to invigorate the trust and faith of the
people of India in the Judiciary that they will be provided imparted speedy justice to
the wrongs done to them by any person. Disposal of criminal trials in the courts takes
considerable time and that in many cases trial do not commence for as long as 3 to 5
years after the accused was remitted to judicial custody. In lieu of this, it is pertinent
that provisions of Criminal Law be changed so as to reduce the time needed for a
common person to get justice. After all “Justice should not only be done, but also be
seen to be done

43
Evidence Act: Admissions and Confessions, LAWYERSCLUBINDIA, (Aug 7, 2017),
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Evidence-Act-Confessions-and-Admissions-6577.asp

19
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS & LEXICONS

 M. MONIR, TEXTBOOK ON LAW OF EVIDENCE( 10th ed. Universal Law Publishing 2015).
 P.RAMANATHA AIYAR, CONCISE LAW DICTIONARY (5th ed. Central Law Publications
2014)
 SUDIPTO SARKAR & V.R MANOHAR, LAW OF EVIDENCE : VOLUME 1( 16th ed. Wadhwa
Nagpur 2008).

ARTICLES AND REPORTS

 Admissions, INDIAN LAW PRIMER,

http://indialegal.blogspot.in/2008/04/admissions.html.
 Asamaya Roy, What is Admission under Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act,
SHAREYOURESSAYS, http://www.shareyouressays.com/119232/what-is-admission-
under-section-17-of-indian-evidence-act
 Indian Evidence Act,1872- Admissions- Meaning, definition & Evidentiary value,
LAWN.COM, (August 7, 2017), http://lawnn.com/indian-evidence-act1872-admissions-
meaning-definition-evidentiary/.
 Shraddha Chaudhri, Confession Under Indian Evidence Act, LEGALSERVICESINDIA,
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/confession-under-indian-evidence-
act-1547-1.html
 What do you understand by Admission? ,HANUMANT, http://hanumant.com/LOE-
Unit4-Admission.html
 Evidence Act: Admissions and Confessions, LAWYERSCLUBINDIA,
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Evidence-Act-Confessions-and-
Admissions-6577.asp
 Admissions: who can make admissions, SNDLAW,
http://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/04/admission-and-who-can-make-admissions.html

20