LexSTATE OF PUNJAB versus HARJAGDEV SINGH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 8 S.C.R. 54 < ). A STATE OF PUNJAB v. HARJAGDEV SINGH (Criminal Appeal No. 817 of 2009) B APRIL 22, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] .. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: \- c s.164 - Confession u/s.164 - Conviction - Acquittal by High Court on ground that requisite procedure relating to recording statement u/s. 164 was not followed - Held: Perusal .. of evidence of the Magistrate shows that necessary questions D were asked and due care was taken before recording the statement of accused - It was specifically told to him that the statement could be used in evidence against him - Time was given to the accused to ensure that he was making the statement voluntarily without any pressure and it was E specifically indicated to him that the statement could be used against him - Therefore, High Court not justified in holding that requisite procedure for recording statement under s. 164 was not followed. • s.218 - Conviction by trial Court - Set aside by High F Court on the ground that charge was defective - HELD: Finding of trial court cannot be set aside merely on ground that no charge was framed or on the ground of any error in relation to the charge. G Prosecution case was that the respondent-accused killed his parents. He was arrested and on his disclosure 1 statement, the crime weapon was found. Thereafter he made a statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate admitting the fact that he killed his H 54 i ' .. STATE OF PUNJAB v. HARJAGDEV SINGH 55 parents. Trial Court convicted respondent under Section A 302 IPC. High Court ordered acquittal holding that PW3 before whom purportedly extra judicial confession was made did not support the prosecution and the requisite procedure for recording confession under Section 164 Cr.P .C. admissible in evidence was not followed and that B the charge was defective as requirement of Section 218 Cr.P.C. was not followed. State filed present appeal. Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The Magistrate, P.W.9, categorically stated C that he observed the requisite procedure relating to recording the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. He referred to the questions that were put to the accused and the warning given to him clearly stating that the confession could be used as evidence against him. D Nowhere in the cross-examination of this witness even a suggestion was made that there was no statement recorded under Section 164 before him. [Para 6] [61-C] 2. Confessions may be divided into two classes i.e. E judicial and extra-judicial. Judicial confessions are those which are made before a Magistrate or a court in the course of judicial proceedings. Extra-judicial confessions are those which are made by the party elsewhere than before a Magistrate or court. Extra-judicial confessions F are generally those that are made by a party to or before a private individual which includes even a judicial officer in his private capacity. [Para 6] [61-E, F] · 3. A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in criminal proceedings, if the making of the G confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise, (1) having reference .to the charge against the accused person, (2) . proceedings from a person in authority, and (3) sufficient, H 56 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 8 S.C.R. A 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. Whether or not 8 the confession is voluntary would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case, judged in the light of Section 24 of the Evidence Act, 1872. The law is clear that a confession cannot be used against an accused person f unless the court is satisfied that it was voluntary and at c that stage the question whether it is true or false does not arise. If the facts and circumstances surrounding the making of a confession appear to cast a doubt on the veracity or voluntariness of the confession, the court may .. refuse to act upon the confession, even if it is admissible D in evidence. One important question, in regard to which the court has to be satisfied with is, whether when the accused made the confession, he was a free man or his movements were controlled by the po
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.