top of page

How Trials are Conducted Based on Confessions Made to Authorities under the BSA

Introduction 


Confessions play a pivotal role in criminal trials, potentially determining the fate of an accused person. However, their admissibility and treatment in courts are not as straightforward as they might appear. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, lays down specific guidelines and safeguards regarding confessions to ensure justice while protecting the rights of the accused. This blog delves into the nuanced legal framework governing confessions, their evidentiary value, and the role of courts in trials involving confessions under the BSA.  


Understanding Confessions 


Confession, in legal terms, refers to a statement made by an accused person admitting guilt or acknowledging facts that can lead to a conviction. It is considered a self-incriminating statement and is distinct from a mere admission. For a statement to qualify as a confession, it must relate directly to the offense and unequivocally establish the accused’s guilt. 


Types of Confessions 


  1. Judicial Confession: These are confessions made voluntarily before a magistrate or during a trial in court. Judicial confessions are considered more reliable as they are recorded under judicial supervision, ensuring adherence to legal safeguards. 

  2. Extra-Judicial Confession: Confessions made outside the court, such as to private individuals or acquaintances, fall into this category. These are inherently weak forms of evidence as they are susceptible to fabrication and lack procedural oversight. 

  3. Retracted Confession: A confession that an accused person later withdraws. Courts scrutinize such confessions closely to rule out coercion or undue influence. Retraction does not render a confession inadmissible, but it necessitates corroboration. 

  4. Confession Leading to Discovery of Facts: Under Section 23 of the BSA, a confession that results in the discovery of new facts or evidence is partially admissible. Only the portion of the confession directly related to the discovery is admissible. 

 

Voluntariness as the Core Principle 


A confession’s admissibility hinges on its voluntariness. The BSA, 2023, emphasizes that a confession must be made free from inducement, threat, or coercion. Section 22 explicitly states that confessions influenced by promises or threats from a person in authority are irrelevant. 

Courts assess the voluntariness of a confession by examining the circumstances under which it was made. Factors such as the accused’s state of mind, custody conditions, and the presence of legal representation are carefully evaluated. 

 

Role of Custody in Confessions 


The conditions under which a confession is made play a crucial role in determining its admissibility. Custodial confessions are particularly sensitive due to the potential for coercion. 

  1. Confessions Made in Police Custody: According to Section 23, confessions made to police officers or while in police custody are inadmissible unless recorded in the immediate presence of a magistrate. This safeguard prevents abuse of power and ensures procedural fairness. 

  2. Protections for Accused Individuals: 

    1. The accused must be informed of their rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to legal counsel. 

    2. Coercion, intimidation, or torture during custody is strictly prohibited. 

    3. Confessions obtained under duress are considered invalid. 

  3. Discovery Proviso: A confession leading to the discovery of material evidence is admissible but only to the extent of the discovered fact. For example, if an accused’s confession leads the police to recover a murder weapon, the recovery and the portion of the confession describing the weapon’s location are admissible. 

 

Evidentiary Value of Confessions 


Confessions, while compelling, are not conclusive proof of guilt. Courts adopt a cautious approach to prevent wrongful convictions based solely on confessions. Judicial scrutiny ensures that confessions are: 

  • Corroborated by Independent Evidence: A confession must align with other facts and evidence presented in the case. 

  • Tested for Reliability: Courts evaluate whether the confession was made voluntarily and without external influence. 


For example, in Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor, the Privy Council clarified that a confession must admit guilt entirely and not merely suggest suspicion. 

 

Key Provisions Governing Confessions under the BSA, 2023 


The BSA outlines clear provisions to regulate the admissibility and use of confessions in trials: 

  1. Section 22: Confessions caused by inducement, threat, or coercion are inadmissible. 

  2. Section 23: 

    1. Confessions to police officers are inadmissible unless made in the presence of a magistrate. 

    2. Discovery of facts based on confessions is admissible to the extent of the discovered fact. 

  3. Section 24: Confessions made by one accused person can be used against co-accused during a joint trial under specific conditions. This provision applies when the confession incriminates both the confessor and others jointly tried for the same offense. 

 

Provisos Under the BSA 


The BSA incorporates several provisos to ensure that justice prevails without compromising procedural fairness: 

  • Promise of Secrecy: A confession does not become inadmissible merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy. 

  • Deception or Intoxication: Confessions made under deception or while intoxicated are admissible if they are otherwise relevant. 

  • Unwarned Statements: A confession remains admissible even if the accused was not explicitly warned that it could be used against them. 

 

Judicial Principles for Evaluating Confessions 


Courts follow established principles to assess the validity and reliability of confessions: 

  1. Role of Magistrates: 

    1. Magistrates must ensure that confessions are recorded in compliance with legal procedures. 

    2. They must verify the voluntariness of the confession by questioning the accused. 

  2. Examination of Circumstances: 

    1. The court considers external factors such as the accused’s mental state, language barriers, and the environment in which the confession was made. 

  3. Landmark Cases: 

    1. Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (1939): Defined "confession" and emphasized the importance of voluntariness. 

    2. State of UP v. Deoman Upadhyaya (1960): Reinforced that custodial confessions are inadmissible unless recorded by a magistrate. 

    3. Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010): Held that narco-analysis, polygraph tests, and brain mapping are unconstitutional without consent. 

 

Conclusion 


Confessions are a double-edged sword in criminal trials—capable of both securing convictions and being misused if obtained unfairly. The BSA, 2023 balances the scales of justice by emphasizing voluntariness, procedural safeguards, and judicial oversight. For legal professionals, understanding the nuances of confession-related trials under the BSA is vital for ensuring justice is served while protecting the rights of the accused. 

 

Comentarios


BharatLaw.AI is revolutionising the way lawyers research cases. We have built a fantastic platform that can help you save up to 90% of your time in your research. Signup is free, and we have a free forever plan that you can use to organise your research. Give it a try.

bottom of page