®* Introduction e ° . CONFESIO FACTA IN JUDICIO OMINI PROBATIONE MAJOR EST CONFESSIO FACTA IN JDICIO EST PLENA PROBATIO Experince suggests that people try to make false confessions to implicate themselves Ina case in 1580 a man was convicted for the murder of a widow near Paris igth Century Person reading news paper and confessing to the crime+ Confession due to mistake of fact or a mistake of law- Father beating his daughter for committing theft- A person exercising private defence + Again a person may make a false confession under expectation of benefit to himself o: others. » Soldiers posted on war duties - Kutty V. Chattapan-Confessing to having illicit relationship with deceased + Nuremberg 1787-Benefit to Children* Definition * Confession is a voluntary statement made by an accused or a person charged with crime in which he acknowledges that he is guilty of committing that crime. © The confession of an accused cannot be used against co accused © Confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged with a crime stating or suggesting the inference that he committed the crime- Stephen © Aconfession must either admit in terms of the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence-Lord Atkin © Ex - an admission that the accused was in recent possession of the knife or revolver which caused death.iculpatory and Exculpatory confessions" The confession where accuse directly admits his guilt is referred as an inculpatory confession. Exculpatory confession, on the other hand, is that confession which absolves the accused from his liability, Only inculpatory confessions can be used as a substantive piece of evidence. Palvinder Kaur V. State of Punjab Palvinder was on trial for murder of her husband along with another, who were abscondinge Things Outside the purview of Confession « Exculpatory Statements e Guilty Conduct * Acknowledgment of Subordinate Facts © Confession need not be adressed to any particular person * Sahoo V. Sate of UP 1966- Aeeused Gfiéd fot Ene mUrde: OF hig GSUShEE fi law“Essentials of Confession It must be made only by accused ora person charged with a crime It must be voluntary statement. Confession must affect the confessor Tt must be toa Magistrate or another person. It must contain a statement admitting the guilt. It must be a statement either oral or documentary. It must be definite and certain.° Classification of confessions © Judicial Confession * Made in front of a magistrate or in a court, may be in the course of a judicial proceeding ¢ Itis known as plea of guilt. If made freely by a person ina fit state of mind. + Section 164 CrPC- SGEGGH 183 BF BNSSe Extra-Judicial Confession * Made by the party elsewhere than before a Magistrate or in open court « A free and voluntary confession of guilt by a person accused of a crime in the course of conversation with persons ¢ It can be accepted and can be the basis of a conviction if it passes the test of credibi ity. ¢ Itis made before a private person even judicial officer in his private capacity.© Retracted Confession * Itisa statement made by an accused person before the trial begins, by which he\she admits to have committed the offence, but which he /she repudiate at the trial.— oa © Section 24-Séétion 83 BSA Confession caused by inducement, threat, QRH or promise from person in authority. * Confession made by an accused is irrelevant ina criminal proceeding * If the making of the confession appears to the court to have been caused by inducement, threat, [EERIE or promise, made by any person in authority * That in the view of the court such inducement etc, gives reasonable ground to the person making the confession, + he would help to gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceeding against him.* Confession caused by inducement, threat, QQQEGIOH or promise * It involves a threat of prosecution if the guilt is not confessed and a promise of forgiveness if it so done. ° Itis pertinent that confession was freely and voluntarily made. It will not be confc inducement, threat or promise. RY. Baldry-Constable telling prisoner* Person in Autho ity The threat ... on account which the accused admits the guilt must come from 4 person who has got some authority over the matter. A person in authority is not merely police officer or a magistrate but every such person who can reasonably hold sway over the investigation or trial. overnment o} icials such as senior military officers, police constable , warden, clerk of the court all have been held to be person in authority, Pyare Lal V. State of Rajasthan- Inducement by friend° Inducement must have reference to the charge * Against the accused person * Empress V. Mohan Lal- The confession by a person who was threatened to be removed from his caste. eit is necessary for the confession to be excluded from evidence that the accused should labor under the influence that inference to the charge in question his position would be better or worse according as he confesses or not.iin ° Benefit of temporal nature ¢ In the opinion of the court, it should be sufficient to give accused person ground that by making the confession he would gain advantage or avoid an evil ¢ The mentality of the accused has to be judged and not that of person in authority. © Taking accused to the temple.a © Section 28-Provise | S8étion 530) BSA- of Confession made after removal o} 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 relevant. + Section 28-BESUE8 | SEEHGH EEG) BSA provides that: « If there is inducement, threat or promise given to the accused in order to obtain confession of guilt from him. mpression caused by any such inducement, threat or © But the confession is made after the promise has, in the opinion of the court been fully removed, © The confession will be relevant as it becomes free and voluntary,impr © Lapse of time + Vali Isa Mahmud V. State 1963 + Ithas been held that in considering the question whether the impression caused by ITCP was fully removed, the court has to see, whether the time allowed for reflection was sufficient or not. + Long interval- A is accused of committing criminal breach of trust * Anintervening caution by person holding superior authority + Where an officer holding superior authority to that of the person holding out inducement cautions the accused, the original impression caused by the inducement is said to have been removed. + Example: Inducement by Police constable.© Byasupervening event- * Where the ITP breaks on account of supervening act, the impression is said to have been fully removed * Example- Death of the Authority.ee ae ® Section 29-Proviso 2 Section 33() BSA Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of promise of secrecy etc. When it was made to the accused under a promise of secrecy. By practicing a deception on the accused When the accused was drunk In answer to question which the accused need not have to answered. When no prior warning was given to accused.omise of secrecy * When a confession obtained from an accused by promising him that he will confes: will be kept secret is relevant under 29 * Aaccused of murdering B © Practicing a deception e When a confession is obtained by fraud and deception with the accused the confession is admissible. ¢ RV. Derrington 1826- Prisoner in jail asking the attendant to post a letter.e Accused was Drunk * Intoxicated persons generally speak truth- Admissible ¢ AConfessing his guilt under the state of intoxication to B. e Ar swer to question/Interrogation ¢ There is no bar to the admissibility of a confession for being made answer te question. © No prior Warning + Cannot give defense that warning was given as to the confession.= aa ® Section 25-Seetion 33 (@) BSA Confession to Police * No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence © Itis presumed that police holds a position of great influence over the accused * So there is a high probability that confessions obtained by the police are tainted with threat or inducement. ¢ Further it is important to prevent the practice of oppression or torture by the police to extract the confession.It strictly disallows any confession made to the police as inadmissible no matter what the circumstance Raja Ram Y, State of Bihar 1964 js not to be interpreted strictly but must be given SC held that the term police office more comprehensive and popular meaning, However, these words are also not to be construed in so wide sense as to include a person on whom only some powers exercised by the police are conferred Thus excise officers and sub-inspectors enjoying police powers were held to be polic« officers._— The test is to determine whether the powers are such would tend to facilitate the obtaining of confession by him from a suspect. It must be borne in mind that section 25$@etion 3 excludes only confession Certain facts can be brought on record and proved against the accused. Queen Empress V. Jagrup- Witnessing the murderer Dagdu V. State of Maharashtra- Confession may not always be short cut to solution.* English Law does not discredit confessions to police as a rule. © if the judge feels that there was no oppression and the statement was free, fair and voluntary, he may admit it © Effect of police presence * Where the confession i being given to someone else and the policeman is only casually present and overhears - does not destroy the value. + Secret agent of police deputed for the purpose. Sita Ram V. State- Letter recording his confession near the dead body.ae ° Statements during investigation and before accusation ¢ A confessional statement made by person to the police even before he is accused of any offence is equally irrelevant. ¢ This means that even if the accusation is subsequent to the statement, the statement cannot be proved.+ Section ty TE PD VBA Consexion by accwwed oie in ennady police not to be proved agains hin, «tie combeeraem sade by any pean WAIVA We bain the Cuan dy Oh peoiew, + thle it i made in the immediate preyane Oh a NAA the, + Vie cwAUAY + fe prhiceanan say Say bio band on 0 prereZ, WAH CUS SID DAVES APA AD 8 Voy 20088 wring tober bri Wh) brioAgain a police officer may not even touch a person but may keep such a control over him that the person so controlled cannot'go anyway he likes A police officer comes to A and asks him to follow to the police station as he is wanted in connection with a dacoity case. A follows him. There must be 2 things in order to constitute custody. Firstly there must be some control imposed upon the movement of the confessor he may not be at liberty to go any way he likes Secondly such control must be imposed by some police officer indirectly RV. Lester - Accused being taken in tanga by police constable» Exception * 1) Inthe presence of a Magistrate * [cis immaterial chat the accused was in the custody while making the confession + The expression immediate presence means presence in the same room before the maker where the contession being recorded e Ex Mag e taking te nis Confession and consequential recovery* Conditions for applicability of section 26 * Statement must amount to confession It must be made while the accused was in police custody. + Jt must not be made in the immediate presence of the magistrate. Following confession are irrelevant Emperor V. Jagia 1938- Woman arrested for the murder of young boy.© Section 27 SECTOHEINGIPEOUBOBEBSA- How much information received from accused may be proved. * Provided that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer © So much of such information, whether it amounts (oa confession or not as relates distinctly to the fact there by discovered, may be proved. © It states that the information given by the accused while in the police custody leading, to the discovery of incriminating material would be admissible irrespective ach information amounts to confession or not, of the fact whether“4 Essentials 1. There must be discovery of fact Fact discovered in consequences of the information 3. Information given by the accused while he is in the police custody. 4. Information directly relates to the fact discovered may be proved. e Discovery of fact The term discovery means finding out or making known In the expression discovery of fact means concrete or material fact.= ° Fact discovered in the consequence of the information © Where the accused made a disclosure statement leading to discovery of the weapon of the offence, the statement of the accused is admissible in evidence as per sec 27 S8800H 3G) + Kaju & AnrV. The State 1985- Accused led the police party to a tank. + Norestriction that the recovery should be immediately after the disclosure statement is made. * Information given by the while he is in the police custody + Person giving information must be in his police custody + Md. Dastagir V. State of Maharashtra 1960- Not necessary to be a accused person.e Information directly relates to the facts discovered may be proved. The information must be such that has caused the discovery of the fact. The information must relate directly to the fact discovered Sogainmuthu Padayachi V. King Emperor It was held that the whole of the statement which leads to the discovery of a stolen article is admissible. Mohd Inayatullah V. State of Maharashtra 1976- Deposit of the three chemical drums.* Section 30-Section 34 6f BSA Consideration of proved confession person making itand others jointly under trial for the same. * When more than persons than one are jointly tried for the same offence, and * A confession made by one such person affect ng himself and some other such persons i proved, * The court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well a uch confession against the person who make * The confession made by one of them admissible in evidence should be taken inte consid st the person who alone made it. ation against all accused and not agae Principles to be followed: Person confessing and the others are being tried jointly They are being tried for the same offence. Confession is affecting the confess rand the others Aand Bare jointly tried for the murder of C Kasmira Singh V State of MP 1952- Jointly accused of conspiracy and killing 0 child.Bhuboni Sahu V. King 1949 * Confession of the co accused not within the definition of evidence * As person who making it hasn't stepped into the witness box and his testimony ha: not been subjected to cross examination ¢ Ex parte evidence against other accused persons.Hari Charan Kurmi V State of Bihar 1964 The confession of a co accused cannot be treated as substantive evidence Can be pressed upon only when court is inclined to accept other evidence, necessity of seeking an assurance in support of its conclusions deductible from other evidence. Pancho V. State of Haryana 2011 Confessions of co-accused can only be used to confirm the conclusion drawn from other evidences ina criminal trial.° Evidentiary value © Double Test: e Whether the confession was perfectly voluntary e Whether it is true or trustworthy. ° Procedure for Recording © Section 164 CrPC-Section 183 of BNSS