This post is inscribed by Rahil Setia
“The Confession of evil works is the first beginning of good works”
- Saint Augustine
I. INTRODUCTION
In the criminal legal system, prominence of the Evidence Law cannot be negated. It gives the base to any investigation or trial and plays a major role in directing the course of any trial. In India, the Evidence Law has been codified in the form of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Under this Act, the provisions relating to Admission and Confession have been dealt under Chapter II of the Act which tackles with the relevancy of facts. It ranges from Section 17 to Section 31. Admission is a broader term and it also covers Confession under the Act.
II. CONCEPTUAL MATRIX OF ADMISSION
Admission has been defined under Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as following:
“An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, 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.”
Electronic form of Admission was inserted by the Information Technology Act, 2000. It must be noted that an Admission, before being considered as relevant, has to fulfill the mandate of Section 18 to Section 23 under the Act.
Case: In Income Tax Officer v. Mangat Ram Norata Ram, it has been observed that an Admission has to be clear and unambiguous in such a way that it reduces the Burden of Proof on the opponent in so far as it relates to such fact, as has been admitted.
Formal & Informal Admission: Formal Admissions are also known as the Judicial Admissions and they are admissible under Section 58 of the Act, unless the Court thinks otherwise. Informal Admission is known as the Extra-Judicial Admissions or Casual Admissions. They are not considered to be a substantive piece of evidence; however, they may be used to determine the veracity of a witness.
Conditions that determine the relevancy of an Admission under the Act:
The relevancy of an Admission is subject to certain conditions mentioned under the Act
Section 18: Parties whose statements are considered to be Admissions:
ü Parties to Suit.
ü Agents of Parties to Suit, if they are authorized to make such statements.
ü Parties in representative character, if statements were made when they continued to be in such representative character.
ü Third Parties, if they have a pecuniary or proprietary interest in the subject matter or they are a predecessor-in-title from whom the parties to the suit have themselves derived their interest.
ü Section 19: Person whose position is in issue and must be proved against the parties to the proceedings. Statements by such person are considered to be Admissions.
ü Section 20: Person who has been called upon by Parties to suit for giving certain information; then statements by such person are considered to be Admissions.
Section 22 & Section 22A: Oral Admissions as to contents of documents and as to contents of electronic record:
It provides that such Oral Admissions are considered to be inadmissible except in cases where the veracity and genuineness of the document or the electronic record is itself in question.
Section 23: Admission “Without Prejudice”
It refers to any Admission made by parties “without prejudice” i.e., with a condition that the same shall not be given in evidence before a Court of law. This condition could be expressly mentioned or it could be inferred from the conduct of the parties. However, this Section doesn’t exempt parties who are otherwise bound to give evidence under Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This provision has been provided under the Act to enable parties to arrive at an out-of-court settlement and settle their issues and disputes in an amicable manner.
Case: In Paddock v Forrester, one party wrote a letter and expressly mentioned the words “without prejudice”, while the party that replied did not do so. It was presented before the court, however, the court held it to be not Admissible.
III. CONCEPTUAL MATRIX OF CONFESSIONS
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 does not expressly define the term “Confession” and therefore the definition of Admission under Section 17 of the Act also applies to Confession. It may also be said that any relevant statement made in a civil case is an Admission whereas if it is made in a criminal case it is referred to as Confession. It is a statement made by any person who is charged with an offence and suggests an inference as to any facts in issue or relevant facts. The inference must however, be such that it suggests that person who confesses, is guilty of the crime. It is hereby pertinent to note that only direct acknowledgement of guilt is a confession and if falls short of an actual admission of guilt, it may still be used against the person who made it as an admission under Section 21 of the Act.
Confession consisting of Inculpatory and Exculpatory portions
It may happen that a statement made by the accused may contain certain portion that are inculpatory and certain that are exculpatory. In such cases the courts cannot just accept one portion and reject the other portion. They have to either accept the whole statement or reject the whole statement. The position of law on this point has been clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, wherein it was observed that to constitute Confession, a statement must either admit guilt in terms or admit all the facts substantially constituting the offence and secondly it stated that a mixed statement cannot be broken down to factor the inculpatory parts and reject the exculpatory parts.
Important conditions regulating Confessions
Section 24: Confession made under threat, inducement or promise:
Such Confessions are considered to be irrelevant. For a Confession to be relevant, it has to be free and voluntary. If inducement, threat or promise is removed, it becomes relevant as given under Section 28.
Section 25: States that Confessions made to a Police Officer cannot be used against the person who is making it.
Section 26: Confessions in Police Custody:
States that such Confession cannot be used against the person who is making it, unless made in the presence of a Magistrate.
Section 27: Statements made, which lead to discovery of fact, becomes admissible even if otherwise inadmissible.
Section 29: Confession, otherwise relevant, doesn’t become irrelevant just because it is made under Promise of Secrecy, in drunkard state or consequence of deception.
Section 31: Admissions are Conclusive Proof, but they act as an estoppel.
IV. CONCLUSION
It must be noted that concepts of Admissions and Confessions are interwoven and closely related. They play a vital role in ensuring the success of a trial.
ความคิดเห็น