WHAT IS A CONFESSION?
Confession doesn’t carry any definite meaning in definition given by ‘Sir James Fitzjames Stephen’ in his ‘A Digest of the Law of Evidence’. According to him, “a confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged with a crime stating or suggesting the inference that he committed a crime”. Thus, in Stephen’s definition an admission amounts to confession if the person accused or incriminated, firstly, states that he committed the crime or secondly, makes a statement by which he does not clearly admit the guilt, yet from the statement some inference maybe drawn that he might have committed the crime. But this definition was unaccepted by jurists.
The confession is nowhere defined in the Indian Evidence Act but the interpretation of admission given under provisions of Section 17 of IEA also applies to confession in an alike method, i.e. provisions for confession occur under the heading of admission. Section 17 signifies that, an admission is a statement, [oral or documentary or contained in electronic form], which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.
While ‘statement’ is a genus, ‘admission’ is a species of statement and ‘confession’ is a species of admission. A confession, if voluntarily and truthfully made is an important piece of evidence and is an ‘efficacious proof of guilt’. If it is found that the confession was made and was free, voluntary and genuine, there would remain nothing to be done by the prosecution to secure conviction.
Case Laws:
Pakala Narayan Swami V. Emperor
Lord Atkin examined and held that “A confession must either be admitted in the context of any offence or in relation with any substantial facts which inaugurate the offence with criminal proceedings. And an admission of serious wrongdoing, even conclusively incriminating fact is not itself a confession”.
Palvinder Kaur V. State of Punjab
The Supreme Court elevated the Privy Council decision in Pakala Narayan Swami case and substantiated their arguments over two reasoning- Firstly, the definition of confession only comes to endure when the statements conferring the admission that he is either liable for any offence or the admission is probating all the facts which establish the offence. Secondly, when the statement has distinctive qualities and contains such a mixture of confessional statements which conclude to the discharge of the person making the confession, then such statements doesn’t amount to a confession.
WHAT IS A FALSE CONFESSION?
Individuals at large are condemned for murders, assaults and homicides yet one may have been barely sentenced for the offence he really didn’t commit. It may sound bizarre but this practice is widespread. Evidence generated through a confession is effective but erroneous.
A false confession is a statement which claims an admission of guilt for commission of crime by a person who hasn’t committed it. In other words, false confession is acceptance of culpability for an offence against the law whereby confessor is not responsible for it. Such a confession which is bogus can be coaxed through coercion, or under mental duress, or due to incompetency of accused. A false confession can said to be an involuntary statement proving guilt for a crime under threat or mental constraint such as anxiety.
In spite of exceptional preparation done for how to behave in direct meetings with an accused person, police can’t separate better than a layman whether suspects are lying or coming clean in front of them. Suspects in confinement routinely give up their self-defensive rights to stay shut and to counsel especially if they are blameless. This is a reason why law has created a series of rules in Indian Evidence Act,1872 under sections 24 to 26 which states confessions when irrelevant or involuntary confessions.
Section 24 of Indian Evidence Act excludes confessions caused by certain inducements, threats and promises. Section 25 deals with confessions made by an accused and excludes confession made to police officer as those confessions are considered involuntary as police officer to secure confession uses shortcut method by putting the arrested person into third degree so that arrested person confesses. Section 26 prohibits proof against any person of a confession made by him in the custody of a police officer, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a magistrate.
CAUSES OF FALSE CONFESSIONS:
Police Interrogation:
Some of the tactics taught to, and then used by, police officers include:
1) The use of false evidence to cause a suspect to believe that there is enough evidence to convict them without a confession
2) Using different psychological tactics based on whether the suspect is considered an “emotional” or “non-emotional” suspect
3) Using bait questions such as, “Why would we find your fingerprints at the crime scene?”
4) Leading a suspect to accept that it is in their best interest to give a confession by convincing him/her that the benefits of confessing are relatively high while the costs are relatively low
5) Accuse the suspect as if they already have substantial evidence against them by using props such as large case files, fingerprint cards, and video tapes, etc.
6) Causing a suspect to believe that a co-suspect has already confessed and implicated them in the crime or that a witness has seen and identified them.
Serious Illness and Substance Abuse:
In excess of 75% of those with mental illness who proffer a false confession also have a co-occurring substance abuse problem. In fact, many of these mentally ill individuals are using illicit drugs at the time of their false confessions to “self-medicate” being that they are not taking their prescription medications.
KINDS OF FALSE CONFESSIONS:
VOLUNTARY FALSE CONFESSION
There are a variety of explanations why people volunteer to make false confessions — such as a pathological need for attention particularly in high-profile incidents mentioned in the news and media; a conscious or involuntary tendency for self-punishment to expiate feelings of remorse for past transgressions; an inability to differentiate fact from fiction due to a failure in perception control, a typical characteristic of serious mental illness; and a desire to shield the actual perpetrator.
COMPLIANT FALSE CONFESSIONS
Contrary to voluntary false confessions, compliant false confessions are those in which suspects are induced to confess to a crime they did not commit through interrogation. In such situations, the defendant responds with a plea demand to exit from a difficult situation, prevent penalty, or receive a conditional or possible reward.
INTERNALIZED FALSE CONFESSIONS
In the third type of false confession, innocent but pliable suspects, told that there is undoubted evidence of their involvement comes to cede not only in their behaviour, but also to believe that they may have committed the crime in subject and often false memories are fabricated in the process. Also, many fake cases surrounding confession involve the use and apparent manipulation of fabricated evidence ruse.
CASE LAW:
Birey Singh vs. State
Under the Evidence Act the confession can only be taken into consideration as against the others. A rule of caution has been adopted by all Courts that A should not be convicted on the basis of B’s confession without material corroboration. In the face of the distinct possibility that the others might have been falsely implicated, it would not be correct to convict them without material corroboration. Unless the Court is in a position to say that the others have not been falsely named in the confession, there would always remain a doubt which would prevent the conviction of the others. If they are to be convicted, that doubt must be removed by the production of evidence indicating the connection of the others with the crime. One cannot be said to be one’s own enemy, and one would have no reason to accuse own self falsely of a crime. One may not lose anything by implicating others falsely, but the same cannot be said of accusing own self falsely.
CONCLUSION
Confessions have always been perceived as the ultimate afterword when a case is on the edge of being completed. They are recognized as no less than a spotless piece of evidence for hurling the suspect in the detention centre for staying years. Confessions play a great role in shaping the judgment. However, such a conjecture is not up to the mark always. False confessions substantiate the last sentence. Confessing to an offence one didn’t commit is unintelligent and one will get inquisitive to know the answer. The answer can be seen as an amalgam of psychology and law. It can be best described as a psychological product leading to legal corollary with a deleterious impact on the victims. False confessions can be seen as a subclass of wrongful conviction.
[1] (1939) 41 BOMLR 428
[2] https://blog.ipleaders.in/confessions-under-the-indian-evidence-act/
[3] Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 1952
[4] AIR 1953 All 785
[5]https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/901939/
Eduindex News 
You must be logged in to post a comment.