Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

45. For the law relating to confessions, we must first turn to the Evidence Act passed with a view to consolidating, defining and amending the Law of Evidence, of which the law as to confessions forms a part. The relevance of confessions is defined in that catena of sections which come under the general heading "Admissions." Section 21 declares that admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, and a confession is an admission. Sections 24 to 29 qualify the generality of this provision, and of these Sections 25, 26, and 27 practically reproduce Sections 148, 149 and 150 of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1861. As these provisions were incorporated in the Evidence Act, which received the Governor-General's assent on the 15th of March 1872; they naturally did not find a place in the Criminal Procedure Code of 1872, which received the Governor-General's assent on the 25th of the same month.

55. These alterations make it clear that it can no longer be contended, on the strength of the decisions in Reg. v. Bai Ratan (1873) 10 Bom. H.C. 166 and Empress v. Anuntram Singh (1880) I.L.R. 5 Calc. 954, that a confession recorded by a Magistrate who afterwards conducts the enquiry is outside the provisions of Section 164.

56. In the view I take, it is unnecessary to consider whether, if the enquiry had actually commenced on the 4th of May, the confessions would have been inadmissible. The authority of Queen-Empress v. Narayen (1893) Ratanlal's Unrep. Cr. Ca. 679 is opposed to this view, and the present inclination of my opinion is that the argument seeks to derive from the provisions of the Code a limitation on the law of confessions as defined by the Evidence Act for which there is no sufficient warrant.