Section 22 BSA 2023: Confession Caused by Inducement, Threat, Coercion or Promise
Section 22 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 provides the rule for excluding a confession in a criminal proceeding when the confession appears to have been caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise connected with the charge and made by a person in authority.
What Section 22 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam means
The central requirement of Section 22 is voluntariness. A confession made by an accused person becomes irrelevant when the Court finds that it was caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise relating to the charge, coming from a person in authority, and sufficiently strong to give the accused a reasonable ground to believe that confessing would secure an advantage or avoid an evil of a temporal nature in relation to the proceedings.
In practical terms, the Court examines the circumstances in which the confession was made, the source and nature of the inducement or pressure, its connection with the accusation, and whether it could reasonably have influenced the accused to confess.
Section 22 - Statutory text
22. Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding. - A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, 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:
Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant:
Provided further that if such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him.
Essential conditions for excluding a confession
- The statement must be a confession made by an accused person.
- The confession must appear to the Court to have been caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise.
- The inducement, threat, coercion or promise must relate to the charge against the accused.
- It must proceed from a person in authority.
- It must be sufficient to give the accused a reasonable ground to suppose that confessing would provide an advantage or avoid a temporal evil connected with the proceedings.
When a later confession may become relevant
The first proviso recognizes that an earlier inducement, threat, coercion or promise does not permanently bar every later confession. If the Court is satisfied that the impression created by that influence has been fully removed before the later confession is made, the later confession may be relevant.
Circumstances that do not by themselves make an otherwise relevant confession irrelevant
The second proviso states that an otherwise relevant confession does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, was obtained through deception, was made while the accused was drunk, was given in answer to questions the accused was not bound to answer, or was made without a warning that the accused was not bound to confess and that the confession could be used in evidence.
Relationship with Sections 23 and 24 BSA
Section 22 should be read with the surrounding provisions on confessions. Section 23 BSA separately deals with confessions made to police officers and confessions made while in police custody. Section 24 BSA deals with consideration of a proved confession affecting the maker and other persons jointly under trial for the same offence.
Related criminal procedure provisions
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 also contains safeguards relevant to confessions. Section 182 BNSS prohibits a police officer or other person in authority from offering or making an inducement, threat or promise of the kind referred to in Section 22 BSA. Section 183 BNSS governs the recording of confessions and statements by Magistrates.
For the official text of the law, see the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 on India Code.
Key takeaway
Section 22 BSA protects the reliability and voluntariness of confessional evidence. A confession influenced by an improper inducement, threat, coercion or promise from a person in authority is irrelevant when the statutory conditions are satisfied. The Court must assess the actual circumstances and the effect of the influence on the accused.