Sections 29 and 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Confessions and Co-Accused
Sections 29 and 30 form part of the law governing confessions under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This article explains the legal position applicable under the 1872 Act before the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force.
Section 29 - Confession Otherwise Relevant Not to Become Irrelevant Because of Promise of Secrecy, etc.
Meaning: Section 29 preserves the relevance of a confession that is otherwise legally relevant merely because of certain circumstances surrounding the making of that confession. It does not itself make an otherwise inadmissible confession admissible.
If a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, as a consequence of deception practised on the accused to obtain it, while the accused was drunk, in answer to questions the accused was not bound to answer, or without a warning that the accused was not bound to confess and that the confession could be used in evidence.
The opening requirement - that the confession must be otherwise relevant - is important. Section 29 therefore operates subject to the other rules governing admissibility of confessions, including the restrictions contained in Sections 24, 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act.
Section 30 - Consideration of Proved Confession Affecting Person Making It and Others Jointly Under Trial for Same Offence
Meaning: Section 30 deals with a proved confession made by one accused that affects both its maker and another accused when they are being tried jointly for the same offence. In the circumstances specified by the section, the court may take the confession into consideration against the other jointly tried accused as well as against its maker.
Where more than one person is being tried jointly for the same offence and a confession made by one of them, affecting that person and another jointly tried person, is proved, the court may take the confession into consideration against the other person as well as against the maker.
Explanation: For Section 30, "offence" includes abetment of, or an attempt to commit, the offence.
Essential Conditions for Applying Section 30
- There must be two or more accused persons.
- They must be tried jointly.
- The joint trial must concern the same offence within the meaning of the section.
- The statement relied upon must amount to a confession and must affect its maker as well as the co-accused.
- The confession must be proved and must itself be legally relevant and admissible.
Evidentiary Value of a Co-Accused Confession
A confession of a co-accused considered under Section 30 is not substantive evidence against the other accused in the same manner as ordinary evidence. The Supreme Court has repeatedly explained that independent evidence must first be considered; a qualifying co-accused confession may then be used to lend assurance to the conclusion supported by that evidence.
Section 30 cannot be used to bypass the statutory exclusions in Sections 25 and 26. A confession that is inadmissible under those provisions does not become admissible against a co-accused merely by invoking Section 30.
Illustrations to Section 30
Illustration (a): A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. A's proved confession states, in substance, that A and B murdered C. Because A and B are being jointly tried, the court may consider the confession against B subject to the legal limits governing Section 30.
Illustration (b): A alone is on trial for the murder of C. Evidence suggests that A and B committed the murder, and B has stated that both participated. Because B is not being jointly tried with A, B's statement cannot be taken into consideration against A under Section 30.
Relationship with Sections 24 to 28
Sections 24 to 30 should be read together when considering the admissibility and use of confessional statements. Section 24 concerns confessions affected by inducement, threat or promise; Sections 25 and 26 restrict proof of confessions to police officers or while in police custody; Section 27 deals with the limited admissibility of information leading to discovery; Section 28 addresses a confession made after the impression caused by inducement, threat or promise has been fully removed; Section 29 deals with specified circumstances that do not, by themselves, make an otherwise relevant confession irrelevant; and Section 30 concerns the limited use of a proved confession affecting jointly tried accused persons.
Legal context: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 position before commencement of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. This page is intended for legal information and should be read with the statutory text and applicable judicial decisions.