- Published on
KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Confession Caused by Inducement, Threat, Coercion or Promise (Section 22)
1. Basic Rule
2. Core Conditions for IrrelevancyConfession is inadmissible if ALL are present:
3. Meaning of Key Elements(a) Person in Authority
(b) Inducement Must Relate to Charge
(c) Temporal Benefit
4. Proviso 1 – Removal of Influence
5. Proviso 2 – Situations Where Confession Still ValidConfession not invalid merely because:
6. Important Distinction
7. Case Principle (Veera Ibrahim Case)
8. Essentials to Apply Section 22Court must check:
9. Key Takeaways
Quick Revision Line👉 A confession obtained by pressure is rejected; only a free and voluntary confession is admissible.
1. Basic Rule
- Confession must be free and voluntary
- If obtained by:
- Inducement
- Threat
- Coercion
- Promise
👉 It becomes irrelevant in criminal proceedings
2. Core Conditions for IrrelevancyConfession is inadmissible if ALL are present:
- There is inducement / threat / coercion / promise
- It is made by person in authority
- It relates to the charge against the accused
- It offers:
- Advantage, or
- Avoidance of harm (temporal benefit)
3. Meaning of Key Elements(a) Person in Authority
- Someone in a position of power or influence
- Example:
- Police officer
- Magistrate
- Employer (in some cases)
(b) Inducement Must Relate to Charge
- Must be connected to offence in question
- Not valid if:
- Threat/promise relates to other matters
(c) Temporal Benefit
- Must involve:
- Worldly/material gain or loss
- Not sufficient:
- Moral or spiritual advice
- “Tell truth, God will forgive you” → valid confession
4. Proviso 1 – Removal of Influence
- Confession becomes relevant again if:
- Effect of inducement/threat is fully removed
- Court must be satisfied that:
- Mind is free and voluntary
5. Proviso 2 – Situations Where Confession Still ValidConfession not invalid merely because:
- Promise of secrecy
- Deception used
- Accused was drunk
- Answer to questions not bound to answer
- No warning given
6. Important Distinction
- Voluntariness = Key test
- Not method, not form, not circumstances alone
7. Case Principle (Veera Ibrahim Case)
- Statement was:
- Not a confession → only admission
- Section 22 applies only to confession, not all statements
8. Essentials to Apply Section 22Court must check:
- Statement is a confession
- Made by accused person
- Made to person in authority
- Caused by inducement/threat/promise
- Related to charge
- Creates reasonable belief of benefit or harm
9. Key Takeaways
- Confession must be free, voluntary, and uninfluenced
- Any improper influence → inadmissible
- Once influence removed → confession becomes valid
- Law focuses on fairness and reliability
Quick Revision Line👉 A confession obtained by pressure is rejected; only a free and voluntary confession is admissible.
0 Comments