In the 1966 case of Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar, the Supreme Court ruled that confessions made to police officers are inadmissible in court under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The judgment clarified that the entire confessional statement, including any details about the crime, is not admissible. This decision aimed to protect accused individuals from potential coercion during police custody. The case had a significant impact on criminal justice, reinforcing the principle that confessions made to police officers cannot be used as evidence, unless Section 27 applies under specific conditions. Learn about other important Landmark Judgements.

Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar Introduction

The landmark case Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar which scrutinised the admissibility of confessional statements under Section 25, Section 26 and Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Supreme Court in its decision on 4th May, 1965 clarified the legal framework surrounding confessions made to police officers.

Download Free Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar PDF

The case involves the confession of the Appellant to the police about multiple murders, leading to the recovery of victims' bodies and the murder weapon. With no eyewitnesses, the confessional FIR was an important piece of evidence. The following are the brief facts of Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar -

• Reporting and Arrest: The Appellant voluntarily reported the commission of the offences to the police. The statement of the Appellant was recorded by a Sub-Inspector who was the officer-in-charge of the local police station. The Appellant confirmed the statement by affixing his left thumb impression and following which he was arrested.
• Collection of Evidence: The Appellant during a joint visit with the police led the Sub-Inspector to the crime scene where the bodies of the victims and the alleged murder weapon, a tangi were recovered. Additionally, a blood-stained cloth (chadar) was also recovered from the residence of the Appellant.
• Medical Evidence: The Post-mortem report revealed that all four victims had multiple incised wounds inflicted by a sharp-cutting weapon consistent with the recovered tangi. The findings of the report indicated that the murders were brutal.
• Lack of Eyewitnesses: The murder had no eye-witnesses and the primary piece of evidence in the case was the confessional FIR filed by the Appellant himself.
• Decision of the Trial Court: The Appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the Judicial Commissioner of Chotanagpur. 
• Appeal in the High Court of Patna: Aggrieved by the decision of the Judicial Commissioner of Chotanagpur the Appellant filed an appeal in the Patna High Court. However, the High Court of Patna confirmed the conviction and dismissed the appeal of the Appellant.
• Appeal to Supreme Court: The Appellant approached the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India and challenged the decision of the Patna High Court.

Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar Issue addressed

The following issues were addressed in the case of Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar -

• Admissibility of Confessions: The Supreme Court examined whether a confessional statement made to a police officer is admissible in court under Sections 25, 26, and 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Now Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023)?
• Scope of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act: The Court analysed the legal implications of Section 25, which makes confessions to police officers inadmissible and whether this provision applies irrespective of the circumstances including the timing of the confession.
• Section 26 and Confessions During Police Custody: Another issue in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar, whether confessions made while in police custody are admissible, and under what conditions they can be used as evidence, particularly in the presence of a Magistrate.
• Application of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act: The Court discussed the exception provided under Section 27, which allows for the admissibility of evidence discovered through information given by the accused while in custody.
• Impact of Confession on Conviction: Lastly, the Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar examined whether a confession made by the accused (in this case, the confessional FIR) could serve as the sole basis for conviction, especially in the absence of eyewitness testimony.

In Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar case Section 25, Section 26 and Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 played a significant role. The following are the legal analysis of these provisions -

Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 25 provides that no confession made to a police-officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. The Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar applied Section 25 to assess whether the confessional statement made by the Appellant to the Sub-Inspector was admissible.

Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 26 deals with the admissibility of confessions made while a person is in police custody. It states that a confession made by a person while in police custody cannot be used against that person unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. In Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar, the confession of the Appellant was not made in the presence of a Magistrate, it fell under this restriction

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 27 allows information given by an accused in police custody to be admissible in court but only to the extent that it leads to the discovery of a fact. The information even if it amounts to a confession can only be used if it directly relates to the discovery of a fact and not the entire confession or statement itself. The Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar noted that even though the Appellant’s confession led to the recovery of victims' bodies and the murder weapon, the entire confession could not be used against him.

Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar Judgment and Impact

The Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar case observed that Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act (IEA) governs confessions made by an accused and states that any confession made to a police officer irrespective of the circumstances is inadmissible as evidence against the accused. This is applicable even if the confession was made when the accused was not in custody or before any investigation commenced.

The Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar noted that Section 26 IEA prohibits the use of a confession made by an accused while in police custody unless the confession is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. The Court observed that Section 27 creates a limited exception to the restrictions in Sections 25 and 26. It allows evidence of any fact discovered as a result of information provided by an accused in custody to be admissible. However, this exception is applicable only to the extent that the information directly leads to the discovery of material evidence.

The Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar observed that a confession given as part of an FIR to a police officer is protected under Section 25 if it amounts to a confessional statement. Such a statement includes not only admissions of guilt but also admissions of any incriminating facts related to the offence. The Court stated that no part of this confessional statement can be used as evidence unless it falls under the ambit of Section 27 and directly leads to the discovery of relevant evidence while the accused is in police custody.

The Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagasia vs State of Bihar referred to several precedents :

• Pakala Narayanaswami v. King-Emperor (1939): Clarified that not all admissions are confessions, especially when they include exculpatory evidence.
• Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab (1953): Reinforced the Supreme Court’s definition of confession.
• Hanumant v. State of U.P. (1952): Highlighted that any admission with a confessional nature is inadmissible if a confession is excluded.

Thus, the Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar ultimately allowed the appeal and overturned the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower courts. The Court held that at the time the Appellant provided the confessional FIR he was not in the custody of the Sub-Inspector.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagesia vs State of Bihar (1966) held that confessional statements made to police officers are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It highlighted that such statements cannot be divided into admissible and inadmissible parts and ensures protection against coercion. Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the conviction.