Sections 25 to 30 of Evidence Act
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 says that Confessions before Police invalid. That is, Law of the Land, the Indian Evidence Act does not accept Confessions made before Police as Evidence to convict an Accused person.
When Police evidence is not accepted by Law courts why Public should be made to believe it as evidence by media? It amounts to subversion of Law on the part of the Government. Where as, nowadays Police stories are sensationalized by Media and thereby people are led to believe that Police stories are true.
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act
No confession made to a [police-officer] shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.
Section 26 of The Indian Evidence Act
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.
Section 27 of The Indian Evidence Act
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.
Section 28 of The Indian Evidence Act
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.
Also Read my articles on
ALSO READ MY ARTICLES ON
Section 29 of The Indian Evidence Act
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.
Section 30 of The Indian Evidence Act
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.] [Inserted by Act 3 of 1891, Section 4.]Illustrations(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.
***
Also Read my articles on
Also Read
Watch my Videos on YouTube channel