Indra Dalal Vs. State of Haryana
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 , Section 120-B , The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27
Murder - Criminal Conspiracy CONFESSION - Admissibility in Evidence - Information provided by all the accused/ appellants in the form of confessional statements, has not led to any discovery - Recovery of scooter is not related to the confessional statements allegedly made by the appellants - This recovery was pursuant to the statement made by 'H' - It was not on the basis of any disclosure statements made by these appellants -Insofar as confessional statement (Mark A) allegedly given by 'J' that is again in another FIR - Situation contemplated under Section 27 of the Evidence Act also does not get attracted - Even if the scooter was recovered pursuant to the disclosure statement, it would have made the fact of recovery of scooter only, as admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, and it would not make the so-called confessional statements of the appellants admissible which cannot be held as proved against them - 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 -Impugned judgment and sentence liable to be set aside.
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 25 , Section 26
Confession - To Police Officer - Held that provision of Section 25 absolutely excludes from evidence against the accused a confession made by him to a police officer - This provision applies even to those confessions which are made to a police officer who may not otherwise be acting as such - If he is a police officer and confession was made in his presence, in whatever capacity, the same becomes inadmissible in evidence.
Topic(s)-Murder - Confession - Acquittal