Confession | Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Confessions are a very powerful piece of evidence in criminal law. However, the applicability and the admissibility are thoroughly regulated by the legal proximity to avoid miscarriages of justice. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 provides provisions for dealing with confessions in India. These provisions address critical issues such as the admissibility of confessions made under coercion or inducement, the role of police and investigators, and specific considerations in cases involving joint trials. To appreciate the role of each provision that is placed within the justice system it is necessary to familiarize yourself with the said provisions.

The Legal Framework on Confession

Confessions in Indian law have long been a topic of intense debate, primarily due to concerns over the potential for abuse and the use of coercion to secure confessions under pressure. Before the comprehensive reforms introduced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, confessions were governed by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, particularly Sections 24-30. The new provisions under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 make the rules more aligned with contemporary issues, focusing on safeguarding human rights and ensuring fairness in the justice system.

The term "confession" is not explicitly defined, but it refers to a statement made by an accused admitting guilt, either wholly or partly.

Key Provisions under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023

The new provisions under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 primarily address the inadmissibility of confessions made under duress, coercion, or inducement, emphasizing the need for confessions to be voluntary and made without any influence from a person in authority.

Section 22: Confession Caused by Inducement, Threat, Coercion, or Promise

Section 22 states that when a person is compelled to make a statement under force, threats, undue influence, or persuasion from a person in a position of authority, such a statement cannot be used in criminal proceedings. This provision protects the accused from giving a confession in circumstances that are coercive and compels them to say something they would not naturally state.

The role of the court is to assess the context of the confession to determine whether the accused's will was overborne. A confession elicited through forceful means is deemed inadmissible. This provision aligns with Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, which also renders confessions inadmissible if they are obtained through coercion, fear, or inducement.

Section 23: Confessions to Police Officers

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 restates the provisions of Section 164 of Civil Procedure Code which allows confessions to be made before the magistrate. According to Section 23:

No confession made to a police officer shall be admissible as evidence against a person accused of any offence. Similarly, a confession made by an accused while in police custody is inadmissible unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate.
However, an exception is provided where any fact is discovered as a result of information given by the accused while in police custody. In such cases, the portion of the information that directly relates to the discovered fact, whether it constitutes a confession or not, may be admissible as evidence.

Section 24: Consideration of Proved Confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence

Section 24 makes provision for circumstances where more than one person is being tried jointly for committing the same offence. It permits the confession of one accused person to incriminate another accused to be admitted as evidence against them. 

Illustration:

(a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said--"B and I murdered C". The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B.

Important Cases

I. State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil (2013)

In the case of State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil [(2013) 12 SCC 17], the Supreme Court held:

“a confession is permissible/admissible only as against the person who has made it unless the same is rendered inadmissible under some express provision.” So we can conclude from it that the person who is confessing (or admitting) must be a party to the proceeding because only in that way can we be able to use the confession (or admission) against him.

2. Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab (1953)

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Privy Council in this case and cited two points: confession must either admit the guilt in terms or admit substantially all the facts and secondly, a mixed-up statement, containing confessional statements which will lead to acquittal is no confession.

3. Kashmira Singh v. State of MP (1952)

In Kashmira Singh v. State of MP, a person named Gurbachan, along with 3 others was accused of the murder of a child. Through his confession, the prosecution was able to give shape to the story and he, with Kashmira Singh was held liable and sentenced to death. Kashmira was acquitted by the Supreme Court on an appeal as an uncorroborated confession was not deemed enough to deprive a person of the right to life.

All Confessions are Admissions But not All Admissions are Confessions

All confessions are a subset of admissions, but not all admissions qualify as confessions. A confession is a specific type of admission where an individual acknowledges guilt regarding a crime, either entirely or substantially, leaving little room for doubt about the commission of the offence. On the other hand, an admission is a broader concept that includes any statement made by a person, oral or written, which suggests an inference about a relevant fact in a case.

While admissions may support or strengthen the evidence, they do not necessarily constitute a direct acknowledgement of guilt or criminal intent, as confessions do. This distinction is crucial in legal proceedings, as the treatment, evidentiary value, and admissibility of confessions and admissions differ significantly.

Conclusion

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 marks a significant step in proper humane confessions in criminal trials while safeguarding the rights of the accused as well as ensuring fairness. The law ensures, amongst other measures, that no coerced confession is admitted, and that confessions are admitted only when corroborated by strong evidence. Voluntary, fair, and transparent confessions remain paramount in upholding justice in India.

References

[1] Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023

[2] Indian Evidence Act, 1872

[3] State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil, [(2013) 12 SCC 17]

[4] Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1953 SCR 94)

[5] Kashmira Singh v. State of MP, (AIR 1952 SC159)