Author- Alka Kumari, [Banasthali Vidyapith]
According to Indian Evidence Act,1872 ADMISSION and CONFESSION means that person voluntarily acknowledge the existence or truth of a particular fact against his interest. When a person is in front of judicial proceeding and makes a admission of certain fact then it becomes easier for the judiciary to find the truth. It is important that fact which are admitted or confessed should be true and voluntary and against the interest of that person who is admitting it or confessing and it won’t be considered as an admission and confession if it is done due to any force or threat.
According to Sec. 17 of Indian Evidence Act, Admission defined as:-
“An admission is a statement , ( oral, documentary contained in electronic form), which suggests any inference as to any fact issue or relevant fact and which is made by any of the persons and under the circumstances ,hereinafter mentioned.”
According to Sec.18 it is clear that who are the persons by whom an admission can be made :-
a.Party to the proceeding
b.Agent authorized by such party
c. Party’s representative
d.Person jointly interested in the subject matter of the proceedings
e.Person from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest or title to the subject matter of the suit
f.Statements made by accused;
Under the following circumstances it is admitted:-
- Admission by representative of a party, if made while holding such representative character;
- Admission by person jointly interested, if made during the continuance of such interest;
- Admission by person, from whom the parties to the suit have derived interest or title, if made during the continuance of such interest;
It is most important that admission must be clear, precise and not vague or ambiguous and the idea that who can do a valid admission according to definition and circumstances is that the statement of parties to the suit or proceedings and also of persons who are not parties to such suits or proceedings. If any statement is stated only for the purpose of reference then it won’t considered under the admission and statement made by person be read completely.Best evidence against the party is of an admission, when it is true and under circumstances which does not make it binding on him. It is substantive evidence of facts admitted by him and public prosecutor can rely upon it. Once admission is duly proved as admissible evidence then it doesn’t matter whether the party appeared for admission in witness box or not. Admission by one of the several defendants is no evidence against others in a suit.
As we have seen that admission had been defined under Sec. 17 of IEA but Confession has not been defined in the Act. Various person tries to define confession in their own terms.
A CONFESSION IS A KIND OF ADMISSION.
According to Stephen, “A confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged with crime, stating or suggesting the inference that he committed that crime.” Confession may be accepted as a conclusive proof. Also confession can be considered against co-accused when it is made by one or two or more accuse jointly who are tried for same offence.
In case :- LORD AKTIN observed that :-“ 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, for example, an admission that the accused is the owner of and was in recent possession of the knife or revolver which caused death with no explanation of any other man’s possession.”
Confession may be of any form. A judicial confession is when confession is made to the court itself and anybody made outside the court is Extra-judicial confession.
Judicial Confession:– it is those confession which are made in front of magistrate during judicial proceeding. In case of Bala Majhi v. State of Orissa , states that a judicial confession has been defined to mean “plea of guilty on arrangement (before a tribunal) if made freely by a person in a fit state of mind.
Example: ‘A’ is having a charge that he had killed ‘G’. here, when the magistrate is recording evidence under Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C. before initiation of trail or at session trail person may confess his guilt and it is considered as judicial confession.
Case State(NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot sandhu, SC observed that the confession are considered highly reliable because no rational person would make admission against his interest unless prompted by his conscience to tall the truth. However, before acting upon a confession the court must be satisfied that it was freely and voluntarily made.
Extra-judicial Confession:- An extra-judicial Confession has been defined to mean “A free and voluntary confession of guilt by a person accused of a crime in the course of conversation with persons other than judge or magistrate seized of the charge against himself.” This confession can be made against any private person. It can be in form of prayer also.
There is a question that whether the retracted confession would be considered or not? To answer this question there is a rule of prudence in which it has been stated that “a court may take into account the retracted confession, but it must look for the reasons for the making of the confession as well as for its retraction. In case of Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, the four-judges bench of the SC observed that a retracted confession may form the legal basis of a conviction if the court is satisfied that it was true and was voluntarily made. But it has been held that a court shall not base a conviction on such confession without corroboration. It is not a rule of law, but is only a rule of prudence.
A confession is substantive evidence against its maker, so that it has been duly recorded and suffers from no legal infirmity it would suffice to convict the accused who made the confession, though as a matter of prudence, the court expects some corroboration before acting upon it. Even then slight corroboration would suffice.
But before acting upon a confession, the court must be satisfied that it is voluntary and true.
- Voluntaries depend upon whether there was any threat, inducement or
- Its truth is to be judged in the context of the entire prosecution case, whether it fits in the proved facts and does not run counter to
 Subs. By Information Technology Act,2000(Act No. 21 of 2000)
 In text book of Evidence Law by , M.Monir
 PAKALA NARAYAN SWAMI V. EMPEROR[AIR 1939 P.C 47]
 AIR 1951 ORISSA 168 (FB)
 AIR 2005 SCW 4148
 LAW OF EVIDENCE, BATUKLAL ADV. (BOOK)
 AIR 1963 SC 1094
We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!
Let us improve this post!
Tell us how we can improve this post?