Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, accused in a murder case under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, challenged an order of the Sessions Judge marking their voluntary statements recorded by the Investigating Officer as exhibits (Exs.P26 to P30) during the trial. The High Court examined the statements and found that they contained confessions regarding the murder but did not lead to any discovery of fact. Relying on the principle that confessions to a police officer are inadmissible under Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, except to the extent they lead to discovery under Section 27, the court held that the trial court erred in admitting the statements. The revision petition was allowed, and the order marking the statements was set aside, directing the trial court to proceed in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revisional Jurisdiction - Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC - Challenge to Order Marking Exhibits - The High Court in revision can examine the legality of an order admitting documents in evidence if it is patently illegal or causes prejudice. (Para 1-6)
B) Evidence Act - Confession - Section 27 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Admissibility of Voluntary Statements - Voluntary statements of accused recorded by Investigating Officer that do not lead to any discovery of fact are not admissible under Section 27. The court held that such statements are hit by Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act and cannot be marked as evidence. (Paras 4-6)
C) Evidence Act - Confession - Sections 25 and 26 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Confession to Police Officer - Confessions made to a police officer are inadmissible unless they lead to discovery of a fact under Section 27. The court held that marking such statements as exhibits without satisfying the condition of discovery is illegal. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether voluntary statements of accused recorded by Investigating Officer, which do not lead to any discovery of fact, can be admitted in evidence under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Final Decision
The revision petition is allowed. The order dated 28.01.2015 passed in S.C.No.64/2012 by the I Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge, Davanagere, marking the voluntary statements of the petitioners as Exs.P26 to P30, is set aside. The trial court is directed to proceed in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Confessional statements not leading to discovery of fact are inadmissible
- Section 27 Indian Evidence Act
- 1872
- Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC
- revisional jurisdiction
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (04) 40
Criminal Revision Petition No.264 of 2015
P.M.Nawaz for Smt.Rashmi Jadhav (for petitioners), K.Nageshwarappa (HCGP for respondent)
Mudderu Rajappa, Mudderu Dhayamappa, D.S.Dhananjaya, D.Rangappa, D.S.Govindappa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition challenging an order of the Sessions Judge marking voluntary statements of accused as exhibits in a murder trial.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought setting aside of the order dated 28.01.2015 passed in S.C.No.64/2012 by the I Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge, Davanagere, which admitted their voluntary statements as evidence.
Filing Reason
The petitioners contended that their voluntary statements recorded by the Investigating Officer did not lead to any discovery of fact and were inadmissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Previous Decisions
The Sessions Judge had marked the voluntary statements as Exs.P26 to P30 during the recording of evidence of PW26 (Investigating Officer).
Issues
Whether voluntary statements of accused recorded by Investigating Officer, which do not lead to any discovery of fact, can be admitted in evidence under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the voluntary statements were confessions to a police officer and did not lead to any discovery of fact, hence inadmissible under Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act.
Respondent State supported the trial court's order, relying on the decision in (2013) 4 Crimes SC 148.
Ratio Decidendi
Voluntary statements of accused recorded by a police officer are inadmissible under Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, unless they lead to the discovery of a fact under Section 27. Since the statements in question did not result in any discovery, they could not be marked as evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
A perusal of the voluntary statements produced by the petitioners reveal that on their arrest, PW26- the Investigating Officer recorded the said statements on 08.12.2012 and 10.03.2012.
Any how scrutiny of all these voluntary statements does not reveal any discovery in pursuance of the facts disclosed.
The learned Sessions Judge has referred to the decision of the Apex Court reported in (2013) 4 Crimes SC 148. But the names of the parties in the said decision are not mentioned.
Procedural History
The petitioners were arrested for offences under Section 302 r/w 149 IPC and other minor offences. A charge sheet was filed in Sessions Case No.64/2012. During trial, while recording evidence of PW26 (Investigating Officer), the voluntary statements of the petitioners were admitted as Exs.P26 to P30. The petitioners challenged this order by filing Criminal Revision Petition No.264/2015 under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 149
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 397, 401
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 25, 26, 27
