Answer By law4u team
Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 - Section 22: Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding
A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion, or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him:
Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion, or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant:
Provided further that 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.
Brief Detail
This section addresses the conditions under which a confession made by an accused person is considered irrelevant in criminal proceedings. Key points include:
- A confession is irrelevant if induced by threats, coercion, or promises from a person in authority.
- The Court assesses whether the accused had reasonable grounds to believe that a confession would lead to an advantage or avoid a disadvantage.
- A confession made after the removal of such inducements is considered relevant.
- Confessions can still be relevant if made under a promise of secrecy, deception, intoxication, or without being warned of the right to remain silent.
Question & Answers
When is a confession considered irrelevant in criminal proceedings?
A confession is irrelevant if it is caused by inducement, threat, coercion, or promise from someone in authority.
What does the Court consider when evaluating a confession?
The Court considers whether the accused had reasonable grounds to believe that confessing would bring them an advantage or help them avoid a disadvantage.
Can a confession made after the influence of inducement be relevant?
Yes, if the impression from the inducement has been fully removed, the confession is considered relevant.
Are there exceptions to the irrelevance of confessions?
Yes, confessions made under a promise of secrecy, deception, intoxication, or without a warning of the right to remain silent can still be relevant.
What happens if a confession is made while intoxicated?
A confession made while the accused is drunk does not automatically render it irrelevant if it is otherwise considered valid.
Example
Example of an irrelevant confession:
If a police officer threatens an accused to confess or face harsher charges, that confession is deemed irrelevant.
Example of a relevant confession despite coercion:
If an accused confesses after realizing they were not under any threat or coercion anymore, that confession is relevant.
Illustrative scenario:
An accused makes a confession while under the influence of alcohol. If the confession can be shown to be coherent and relevant, it may still be admissible despite the intoxication.
Summary
Section 22 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 outlines the conditions under which confessions made by accused persons are considered irrelevant in criminal proceedings. It emphasizes the importance of voluntary confessions, free from coercion or inducement, while also acknowledging specific circumstances under which confessions can still be admissible. The section aims to protect the rights of the accused and ensure the integrity of the judicial process.
