Vnb SEMINARARMY 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