Truth Or Coercion? A Critical Examination Of Confessional Evidence In Indian Law
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 hours ago
- 2 min read
Nikita, Amity Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Amity University, Noida
ABSTRACT
Confessional evidence occupies a controversial yet pivotal position in the Indian criminal justice system, raising a fundamental question: is a confession truly an expression of truth, or a product of coercion? This article critically examines the legal framework governing confessions in India, primarily under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with particular focus on the admissibility, reliability, and voluntariness of such statements.
The study explores key statutory provisions, including Sections 24 to 30 of the Evidence Act, which lay down safeguards against involuntary confessions, and evaluates their effectiveness in practice. It further analyzes judicial interpretations by the Supreme Court of India, highlighting landmark cases that have shaped the doctrine of voluntariness and the exclusion of coerced confessions. Despite strong legal safeguards, instances of custodial violence, police pressure, and misuse of authority continue to challenge the integrity of confessional evidence.
This article adopts a doctrinal and analytical approach to assess whether existing legal protections adequately prevent coercion or merely provide a theoretical safeguard. It also engages with constitutional principles, particularly Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees protection against self-incrimination, and examines its interplay with investigative practices.
Ultimately, the article argues that while Indian law formally prioritizes voluntariness and fairness, systemic deficiencies and enforcement gaps often undermine these principles. It calls for stricter procedural safeguards, greater judicial scrutiny, and the incorporation of modern investigative techniques to reduce reliance on confessions. By addressing the tension between truth- seeking and rights protection, this study contributes to the broader discourse on ensuring justice, accountability, and human dignity within the criminal process.
