Question
In which of the recent cases, the Supreme Court has
summarized and reiterated the Rule of inadmissibility of confessions made to Police officer in police custody?Solution
In Indra Dalal v. State of Haryana 2 issues were raised 1) Whether the prosecution has been able to prove the involvement of the appellants with the aid of Section 120-B of the IPC (ie Criminal Conspiracy) 2) Whether conviction could be sustained on the basis of confessions to police officer in police custody The Supreme Court observed that the confessional statements were recorded after the arrest of the accused while they were in police custody. Therefore, such statements were inadmissible having regard to the provisions of Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The approach of the High Court relying upon the confessional statements, otherwise inadmissible, with the aid of 'other connected evidence' is contrary to law. The inadmissibility of confessional statements, stood accepted and established by the Court owing to the joint operation of Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act,1872, whereby confession to a police officer and confession made by an accused in police custody do not stand proved as against him. The bench was of the view that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the charge of conspiracy against these appellants with the aid of Section 120-B of IPC. As a result, the appeals were allowed and the impugned judgment and sentence were, accordingly, set aside. In Ramakant Mishra v. State of UP, it was held that mere fact that in the dying declaration an oath had been administered to the deceased before recording the same, would not doubt the credibility of the dying declaration and would not nullify the same. In State of Punjab v. Dhanjit Singh Sandhu, it was held that the doctrine of “approbate and reprobate” is only a species of estoppel, it implies only to the conduct of parties. As in the case of estoppel it cannot operate against the provisions of a statute. It is settled proposition of law that once an order has been passed, it is complied with, accepted by the other party and derived the benefit out of it, he cannot challenge it on any ground “Law does not permit a person to both approbate and reprobate. This principle is based on the doctrine of election which postulates that no party can accept and reject the same instrument and that ‘a person cannot say at one time that a transaction is valid and thereby obtain some advantage, to which he could only be entitled on the footing that it is valid, and then turn round and say it is void for the purpose of securing some other advantage”.
What is the length of recently inaugurated Bundelkhand expressway will connect Chitrakoot in the underdeveloped Bundelkhand region with the Lucknow - A...
Who was the most searched Indian sportsperson globally in 2024?
National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) has partnered with ________ under the Skill India Mission to support self-employment and augment entrepren...
Who was recently (Nov 2024) appointed Secretary General of the World Agriculture Forum?
World Arthritis Day is observed annually on which date?
Which of the following bacterial infections most commonly affects the lungs?
The government has revised the crop residue management guidelines, thus enabling efficient ex-situ management of paddy straw generated in Punjab, Haryan...
Which feature will allow a secondary user to make payments using the primary user’s bank account under the new UPI guidelines?
Which country hosted the South Asian Youth Table Tennis Championship 2023?
Recently RBI launches the first pilot project for central bank digital currency (CBDC), also known as digital rupee or e-rupee, the central bank has id...