Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Whether Statement Made before Police during Investigation can be Considered during Appreciation
Admissibility of Police Statements and Diaries Statements made to police under Section 161 CrPC are generally not admissible as evidence in court unless they are reiterated or affirmed during trial. Police diaries, which record day-to-day investigation details, are primarily for investigation purposes and are not directly admissible as substantive evidence. They are meant to facilitate fair investigation and are not evidence unless specifically used during trial. ["2025 0 Supreme(Jhk) 263"]
Statements to Police and Evidentiary Value Statements recorded by police under Section 161 CrPC, or under Section 164 CrPC, do not hold evidentiary value unless they are affirmed or reiterated in court. Witnesses or accused persons can deny making such statements during trial, rendering the police-recorded statements inadmissible as substantive evidence. Convictions cannot solely rely on police statements; witness testimony in court is essential. ["2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 18840"]
Statements of Co-accused and Investigation Statements made by co-accused during investigation can be considered as clues or leads to investigate further, but they are not conclusive evidence. The court and investigating authorities can use such statements to guide inquiry, but the final prosecution and conviction depend on evidence adduced during trial. The legal position, as per Supreme Court rulings, allows consideration of co-accused statements as part of the investigative process, not as substantive proof. ["2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 932"], ["2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 649"], ["2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 899"]
Confessions and Statements Made Outside Police Custody Confessions made outside police custody or before investigations begin are admissible and can be considered during appreciation of evidence. However, confessions made to police during investigation are generally inadmissible unless recorded under specific safeguards (e.g., Section 164 CrPC). The scope of Section 162 CrPC excludes such statements from being used as evidence at trial unless they are re-affirmed in court. ["2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 365"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 2479"]
Contradictions and Court's Discretion Courts scrutinize police statements, diary entries, and witness testimonies during appreciation. Statements recorded under Section 161 are often contradicted by subsequent court testimonies, and their evidentiary value is limited. The court's role is to assess the credibility and reliability of these statements in conjunction with other evidence. ["2023 0 Supreme(All) 2738"], ["2023 0 Supreme(All) 1679"]
Analysis and ConclusionStatements made before police during investigation, particularly those recorded under Section 161 CrPC, are generally not admissible as substantive evidence for conviction unless they are reaffirmed under oath during trial. They serve as investigative leads rather than conclusive proof. The court can consider such statements during appreciation of evidence, but their evidentiary weight is limited, and they cannot solely form the basis for conviction. The final evaluation depends on corroborative evidence and the demeanor of witnesses during trial.
References:- 2025 0 Supreme(Jhk) 263- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 18840- 2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 932, 2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 649, 2025 0 Supreme(Guj) 899- 2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 365- 2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 2479- 2023 0 Supreme(All) 2738, 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1679
In the high-stakes world of criminal trials, evidence forms the backbone of justice. But not all information gathered during an investigation holds equal weight in court. A common question arises: in Criminal Case – specifically, are statements made by individuals to police officers during an investigation ? This issue strikes at the heart of fairness, protecting against coercion while allowing legitimate discoveries to surface. This blog post breaks down the legal framework under Indian law, drawing from key statutes and judicial insights to provide clarity.
Under Indian law, statements made to police officers during the course of an investigation are generally not admissible in court as evidence of the truth of the facts asserted. This protection stems primarily from , which bars their use at trial for establishing the facts contained therein, with limited exceptions. 2003 0 Supreme(AP) 132
The rationale is clear: to prevent abuse, coercion, and ensure the integrity of testimony given under oath in court. As the has emphasized, these statements are not but tools for limited purposes. 2014 8 Supreme 257
For instance, explicitly excludes made to police officers from being proved against an accused. 1923 0 Supreme(Cal) 450 This safeguard prevents through potentially forced admissions.
or notes recording such statements are similarly restricted. They cannot be used as evidence unless permitted by law, primarily for contradiction or specific discoveries. 2014 8 Supreme 257 1923 0 Supreme(Cal) 450
While the bar is strong, exceptions exist to balance investigation needs with trial fairness:
A under Section 27 is essentially a memorandum of confession recorded by the Investigating Officer. When proving it, the officer must testify to the conversation, adhering to rules against under . Only the portion distinctly leading to discovery is valid. 2024 4 Supreme 10
Contradiction of Witnesses (): Statements can impeach a witness's credibility by highlighting inconsistencies with prior police statements. 2003 0 Supreme(AP) 132 1923 0 Supreme(Cal) 450
Other Limited Uses: Statements may support or, in rare cases, if recorded before a Magistrate under . 2022 0 Supreme(All) 1169
These exceptions ensure relevant facts emerge without undermining the core protections.
The has repeatedly reinforced these limits. In cases like , it reiterated that Section 162 CrPC prohibits using police-recorded statements at trial except under specific conditions. 2003 0 Supreme(AP) 132
Courts scrutinize recoveries tied to disclosures. For example, in a murder case appeal, the noted grave contradictions in complainant statements about FIR registration – whether written or oral – and stressed non-production of . It held that recoveries from open spaces without serological proof or proper disclosure memos lack evidentiary value, reversing a conviction. 2024 4 Supreme 10
Similarly, in a case under , recovery of stolen jewellery from an agricultural field at the accused's behest was upheld because it was from exclusive knowledge, with no explanation offered by the accused. 2022 0 Supreme(All) 1169
On witness statements, courts have clarified that police-recorded versions under have no evidentiary value and cannot be used substantively by drawing the Investigating Officer's attention indirectly. They serve only for contradiction. 2013 0 Supreme(Pat) 604
The plight of witnesses turning hostile due to pressure highlights broader issues. As noted in a significant ruling, The statement made before the Police during investigation is no evidence, underscoring the need for witness protection to prevent trials from being putrefied and paralysed. 2017 0 Supreme(Guj) 1587
In corruption scam probes, statements of former accused turned must still be supplied under , ensuring no evasion of disclosure rules. 2013 0 Supreme(All) 2036
Law enforcement must avoid relying on these statements as substantive proof unless they fit exceptions like Section 27. Investigating Officers testifying on disclosures must narrate events precisely, avoiding inadmissible . 2024 4 Supreme 10
Counsel can leverage Section 145 for contradictions, challenging unreliable testimony. Scrutinize FIR delays, unsigned statements, or unproven recoveries – as seen where motives acted as a double-edged sword and non-serological evidence doomed prosecution. 2024 4 Supreme 10
In summary, while investigations rely on police statements, courts appreciate evidence cautiously to uphold fairness. These restrictions safeguard accused rights and trial integrity, as affirmed across rulings. 2014 8 Supreme 257 1968 0 Supreme(Pat) 187
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on legal provisions and case law. It is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for advice specific to your situation, as outcomes may vary by facts and jurisdiction.
Word count: Approximately 1050
#CriminalLaw #EvidenceAct #PoliceStatements
Thus, from the aforesaid discussion it is evident that the police diary is only a record of day-to-day investigation made by the investigating officer. ... his investigation, the place or places visited by him, and a statement of the circumstances ascertained through his investigation. ... The object of these sub- sections is to facilitate a fair investigation since a #....
No conviction can be sustained merely on the basis of a police statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 CrPC, particularly when the witness, while deposing on oath before the trial court, denies having made such a statement. ... The legal position is well-settled that statements made before the police and the statement recorded under Section 164 of CrPC have no evid....
Now the question which is required to be considered at this stage is whether the investigation is to be commenced and/or proceeded on the basis of the statements of the co-accused and whether the Investigating Officer should be permitted to further investigate the case and/or whether at this stage even ... All these things are required to be considered after the investigation#H....
Now the question which is required to be considered at this stage is whether the investigation is to be commenced and/or proceeded on the basis of the statements of the co-accused and whether the Investigating Officer should be permitted to further investigate the case and/or whether at this stage even ... All these things are required to be considered after the investigation#H....
Now the question which is required to be considered at this stage is whether the investigation is to be commenced and/or proceeded on the basis of the statements of the co-accused and whether the Investigating Officer should be permitted to further investigate the case and/or whether at this stage even ... All these things are required to be considered after the investigation#H....
It covers a confession made when he was free and not in police custody, as also a confession made before any investigation has begun. The expression "accused of any offence" covers a person accused of an offence at the trial whether or not he was accused of the offence when he made the confession. ... The words of S. 162 are wide enough to include a confession made to a....
The learned Judge observed that even assuming that he was caught by a Constable and taken to a police station, the statement made by him should be considered in his favour. ... Even assuming that he was caught by a constable going off with the blood-stained spear and taken to the police station, the statement he made there should certainly be considered#HL_END....
Thus, there is a grave contradiction on this important aspect as to whether the report was submitted by the complainant(PW-1) in the form of a written complaint or whether the oral statement of complainant(PW-1) was recorded by the police officials at his home leading to the registration of FIR(Exhibit ... On the next day the police have taken my statement. The Poujadar recorded my #HL_S....
in contradiction to the statement under Section 161 as well as the subsequent statement which was recorded as a 'Majeed Bayan' by the Police. ... The question as to whether an order passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. would cease to be operative if the trial of the co-accused has been concluded, has been considered in Shashikant Singh v. ... the particular case being considered." ... It is ....
Section 162 lays down that no such statement made by any person to a police officer shall if reduced to writing be signed “nor shall any such statement or any record thereof whether in a ‘police diary’ or otherwise” be used for any purpose at any inquiry or trial save as provided under that section. ... It further lays down that the police officer during inves....
Section 25 of the Evidence Act provides that no confession made to a police officer shall be proved against a person accused of an offence. A confession or an admission is evidence against the maker of it, unless its admissibility is excluded by some provision of law. The confession or statement of accused can be made during investigation before police officer. The language of Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which protects the accused as well as suspects a....
The statement made before the Police during investigation is no evidence. The plight of the girls who were under pressure depicts the tremendous need for witness protection in our country if criminal justice administration has to be a reality…………….” Unfortunately, in cases involving influential people the common experience is that witnesses do not come forward because of fear and pressure………………. As appeared from the evidence of witnesses they backed out from what was stated d....
He has admitted that he could not remember whether he had mentioned in his written complaint that Nitya Narayan had instigated the others to murder the victims. He has also disclosed that while his brother and others were chased by some persons who were known to him and others were strangers, none of them chased him. He then agreed that he has disclosed for the first time before the Court that Nitya Narayan Chatterjee was armed with a knife. He has further deposed that he could not r....
Trial resulted in conviction and sentence and the judgement was affirmed in appeal by the High Court. The question arose before Supreme Court whether the statement recorded before formal registration of the case at Lahori Gate police station by Ante Corruption Inspector, can be said to be a statement recorded during investigation. Then comes the question whether any statement made by accused in answer to the questions put by Inspector is admissible or not. The Court held that....
But made an exception by inserting proviso impeaching the credit of the witnesses in the manner provided under the Evidence Act showing contradiction to earlier statement. In this case the Court has considered the intention of legislature of excluding the statement of witnesses made before the police during investigation for being made use during trial for any purpose. The Court has held that the statement in writing made by a witness before a Police Officer in course of inve....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
