- Published on
KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Consideration of Confession Affecting Co-Accused (Section 24)
1. Basic Rule
2. Important Clarification
3. Essential ConditionsAll must be satisfied:
4. When Not Applicable
5. Nature of Evidence
6. Judicial View
7. Key Principles
8. “Tried Jointly” – Meaning
9. “Same Offence” – Meaning
10. Explanation II (Important Addition)
11. Practical Illustration
12. Key Takeaways
One-Line Summary👉 Section 24 allows the court to consider a co-accused’s confession in joint trials, but only as weak corroborative evidence—not as substantive proof.
KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Consideration of Confession Affecting Co-Accused (Section 24)
1. Basic Rule
- When:
- Two or more persons are jointly tried, and
- One accused makes a confession implicating himself and others
- The maker, and
- The co-accused
2. Important Clarification
- Confession of co-accused is:
- Not substantive evidence
- Only a supporting circumstance
3. Essential ConditionsAll must be satisfied:
- Joint Trial
- More than one accused tried together
- Same Offence
- Must be identical offence (not merely same kind)
- Confession Must Implicate Both
- Must affect:
- The maker, and
- The co-accused
- Must affect:
- Confession Must Be Proved
- Properly proved before court
4. When Not Applicable
- If accused are not jointly tried
- If offences are different
- If confession implicates only others, not maker
5. Nature of Evidence
- Confession of co-accused:
- Not evidence in strict sense
- Only additional assurance
6. Judicial View
- In Kashmira Singh v State of M.P.:
- Confession of co-accused = weak type of evidence
- Cannot be sole basis of conviction
7. Key Principles
- Cannot replace independent evidence
- Must be used with great caution
- Only to lend support to other evidence
8. “Tried Jointly” – Meaning
- Must be part of same trial proceedings
- If one accused tried earlier and others later → ❌ Not applicable
9. “Same Offence” – Meaning
- Must be identical offence
- Not just same nature or punishment
10. Explanation II (Important Addition)
- Even if:
- One accused absconds, or
- Does not respond to proclamation
11. Practical Illustration
- A and B tried together
- A confesses: “B and I committed murder”
- Consider it against B
- But cannot convict B only on this basis
12. Key Takeaways
- Confession of co-accused = weak corroborative material
- Cannot be sole basis of conviction
- Requires independent supporting evidence
One-Line Summary👉 Section 24 allows the court to consider a co-accused’s confession in joint trials, but only as weak corroborative evidence—not as substantive proof.
0 Comments