Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.62 seconds)

Manik Malakar vs State Of Assam on 2 July, 1976

Admission of any incriminating fact is not an admission of a guilt. [See Manikmalakar Vs. State of Assam, 1976 Cri. LJ 1921]. Admission by a party as a whole has to be looked into for arriving at a conclusion and it is required to be read in its entirety. No statement read out of context can constitute an admission of any fact. Difference between the term "admission" and "confession" is also required to be understood. Where a statement of a person merely contains an admission of a fact, which may be relevant, but no admission of guilt or of a fact constituting the offence it would only be an admission and not a confession. An admission, in order to be competent and to have the value and effect should be clear, certain and definite, and not ambiguous, vague or confused. Every admission should be given a plain literal and a fair meaning and its scope should not be widened or restricted on the basis of suspicions or surmises. Statements when their natural import will not bear out the interpretation that is sought to be put on them, would not amount to admissions of the points which are sought to be made out. Statements to operate as admissions must be clear in their meaning.
Gauhati High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1