A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said, “B and I murdered C”. Can the court consider the effect of this confession as against B?

Question: A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said, “B and I murdered C”. Can the court consider the effect of this confession as against B? [U.P.C.J. 1992, HR.J.S. 1998, U.P.A.P.O. 1988, WB.J.S. 1999]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said, “B and I murdered C”. Can the court consider the effect of this confession as against B?]

Answer

The confession of one of two or more accused jointly tried for the same offence can be taken into consideration against the co-accused under section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act.

Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act talks about Consideration of proved confession affecting a person making it and others jointly under trial for the same offence.

It states “When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of 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.”

This section comes into play when more than one person is jointly accused of the same offence. Here, if one of the co-accused makes a confession regarding himself and some other such persons, the court will take that confession into account against the accused and his co-accused

The Supreme Court has held in Balbir Singh v. Punjab State, AIR 1957 SC 216 that a confession must implicate the maker substantially to the same extent as the other accused person against whom it is sought to be taken into consideration. Thus the test is that the confessing accused must tar himself and the person or persons he implicates with one and the same brush.

The facts of the present case are borrowed from Illustration (a) appended to section 30. In the case, when A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C and it is proved that A said—”B and I murdered C”. The Court may consider the effect of this confession of A as against B as well because they are being jointly tried for the same offence.

The court in the case of Queen-Empress v. Jagrup, [(1885) 7 All 646, 648] explained the object of section 30 as: “The object of this section is that where an accused person unreservedly confesses his own guilt, and at the same time implicates another person who is jointly tried with him for the same offence, his confession may be taken into consideration against such other person as well as against himself, because the admission of his own guilt operates as a sort of sanction, which, to some extent, takes the place of the sanction of an oath and so affords some guarantee that the whole statement is a true one.”

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
2. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-II
3. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-III
4. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IV
5. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-V
6. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
7. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VII
8. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
9. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IX
10. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-X