Welcome to Drishti Judiciary - Powered by Drishti IAS








Indian Evidence Act

Home / Indian Evidence Act

Criminal Law

Section 29 of IEA

    «    »
 08-May-2024

Introduction

The Common Law rule is that the admissibility of evidence is not affected by the illegality of the means by which it was obtained. Section 29 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) merely codifies this law that admissible evidence is evidence by whatever means it is obtained.

Section 29 of IEA

  • This Section deals with the confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of promise of secrecy, etc.
  • It states 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 practiced 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.
  • The purpose of this Section is that it ensure that relevant confessions are not excluded solely based on the manner in which they were obtained.

Scope of Section 29

  • The principle of exclusion of a confession is its testimonial entrust, worthiness or involuntary character and hence a confession obtained by deception etc., is not deemed to be irrelevant.
  • This Section lays down that if a confession is not excluded by Sections 24, 25 or 26 of the IEA, it will not be excluded on the grounds of:
    • Promise of secrecy.
    • In consequence of a deception practiced upon the accused.
    • When he was drunk.
    • In answer to questions which he need not have answered.
    • Without warning he was not bound to make the confession and that evidence of it might be given against him.

Limitation of Section 29

  • Though this Section allows for the admissibility of confessions under certain conditions, it does not imply that any confession obtained under these circumstances is automatically admissible.
  • Courts still have the discretion to assess the voluntariness of the confession and consider the surrounding circumstances.