Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Murder Conviction, Says Purported Confession To Police Official Not Admissible In Eyes Of Law

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday set aside the conviction of an accused under Section 302 of IPC on the ground that the verdict was based on the alleged written confession made by the accused before the police while in custody.

The division bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen noted:

“Since PW7 is a police official, such writing which according to the prosecution is a confession of the present appellant is not admissible in the eye of law and therefore the learned trial court while passing the impugned judgement ought to have discarded the oral testimony made by PW7 and in course of trial, the said trial court ought not to have admit the alleged written confessional statement of the present appellant into evidence by marking the same as Exhibit. It may be relevant to emphasize merely because the purported confession was in writing it would not escape the exclusion clause engrafted in Section 25 of the Evidence Act.”

The accused-appellant was tried under Section 302 of IPC for the alleged offence of murdering his own daughter. The trial court convicted the appellant on the basis of an alleged written confessional statement made by him to a police constable (PW7).

The trial court on July 30, 2015 found the appellant guilty under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-.

The appellant approached the High Court assailing the impugned judgement and order of the trial court. The counsel appearing for him contended that in view of the provisions of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a confession made before a police officer is not admissible in the eye of law and therefore the trial court committed error in placing reliance upon the oral evidence of PW7 and alleged written confession made by the appellant before him.

The court, while relying upon various legal provisions and the judgment of Supreme Court in Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, observed that confession made to a police officer while in shall not be proved as against a person accused of any offence.

"Since before the learned trial court apart from oral evidence of PW7 and Exhibit 7 no other material is available to sustain the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as against the present appellant, we are constrained to hold that the learned trial court is not justified in passing the impugned judgement."

Thus, the court set aside the impugned judgement of conviction and order of sentence dated July 30, 2015 passed by the trial court and acquitted the appellant.

Case Title: Idrish Ansary v. The State of West Bengal

Click Here to Read/Download Order