Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. I would then examine another piece of incriminating material, which is the confessional statement of accused Nenkuri. The said confessional statement has been exhibited as Ext. 16 and the learned Magistrate who recorded the confession has been examined as P. W. 12. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge has rejected the said confessional statement (Ext. 16) on the ground that the requirements of Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. have not been complied with, inasmuch as the statement does not point out the warning against making of the confession, nor does it show that the confession was made voluntarily and further that there was no sufficient time given to the person making the confession to have a cool reflection. I have gone through the confessional statement (Ext. 16) and in my view the learned Assistant Sessions Judge was justified in rejecting the confession since the requirements of Section 164 of the Cr. P. C. have not been complied with. Accused Nenkuri, however, in his statement under Section 313 of the Cr. P. C. admitted the guilt and it is not known as to why the learned Assistant Sessions Judge has not considered that at all.