Evidence act on slide section 26 to section 31
NEW DELHI :-Evidence act on slide section 26 to section 31 ,
26. Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved against him. – No confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police-officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a [Magistrate], shall be proved as against such person.
[Explanation. – In this section “Magistrate” does not include the head of a village discharging magisterial functions in the presidency of Fort St. George [* * *] or elsewhere, unless such headman is a Magistrate exercising the powers of a Magistrate under the [Code of Criminal Procedure. 1882 (10 of 1882)].]
27. How much of information received from accused may be proved. – Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police-officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.
28. Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, threat or promise, relevant. – If such a confession as is referred to in section 24, is made after impression caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant.
29. Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of promise of secrecy, etc. – If such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him.
30. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence. – When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession.
[Explanation. – “Offence” as used in this section, includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, the offence.]
(a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said – “B and I murdered C”.
The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B.
(b) A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B and that B said – “A and I murdered C”.
This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried.
31. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop. – Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained.