• Evidentiary Value of Audio Recording of the Extra Judicial Confession or Admission of Guilt

What is the evidentiary value of extra judicial confession given to the victim, the claimant ? And how the audio recording of extra judicial confession given to the victim is favored by the court ? The extant case is, I am the victim of a Conspiracy and Fraud. The Fraud took place in mid Feb 2018, but I was able to extract the confession/ admission from the accused only after a month, i.e. from mid Mar 2018. All these confessions were audio recorded. I got the confession on 8 occasions thereafter from 4 different guys who were directly or indirectly involved or hatched the conspiracy and assisted the main accused who perpetrated the Fraud. The narratives given by them are consistent. But my concern is, these are extra judicial confession and extra judicial confession is always weak. I am the victim and witness of their confession. The accused gave the confession only with an expectation that I won't take the legal recourse against them. If the court will accept the extra judicial confession obtained in this manner assuming that all the audio recordings may pass through Forensic Test ? I am not seeing a similar case in the data base to know the opinion of the apex court in case of a extra judicial confession given to the victim and produced in the court in the form of an audio recording..
Asked 1 year ago in Criminal Law from Greater Mumbai, Maharashtra
Religion: Hindu

only a confession which is voluntary and true can be acted upon that a confession which if free from any threat, inducement or promise.

 

2) extra judicial confession is a weak type of evidence. It cannot be accepted merely because it is made by the accused himself and contains a wealth of details. 

 

3) . Its evidential value is very less since there are chances that it can be untrue due to the state of mind of accused or may be influenced by force or under threat etc. Hence, they must be considered in collaboration with other evidence on the record. A court must as a matter of prudence resist from convicting a person solely on the basis of a confession. 

 

4) It is required to be established from the facts and evidence produced as

to whether the accused made the extrajudicial confession or not.

 

5) The veracity of the extrajudicial confession is read from the credibility

of the persons to whom made, the circumstances in which made and the explanations of the delay between the receipt of confession by a person and its transmission to the Police.

5. Extra judicial confession if voluntary and true can be a sufficient evidence for base of conviction of the accused but if the same is corroborated with some additional independent evidence, the role of prudence also gets thereby satisfied. 

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
71952 Answers
4324 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

See if the victim has accepted themselves and Same is audio recorded and you have the source where it was recorded. Same Audio can be verified by the FSL report and court can consider same as evidence. 

It won't be treated as confession but the confessional statement can be recorded as evidence for the case.

It has to be corroborated with other evidences and facts of the case. The statement recorded must be voluntary not and under any threat and duress if so they will be accepted.

Shubham Jhajharia
Advocate, Ahmedabad
22816 Answers
92 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Hello, 

Have you filed any case till date? 

This evidence on your part does not amount to extra judicial confession. 

These are the statement obtained by you on your personal lever and holds very weak value until and unless corroborated by other evidence. You may produce it in the court but no conviction will be made on this ground alone. 

 

Regards 

Anilesh Tewari
Advocate, New Delhi
17400 Answers
280 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Dear Client,

Extra-judicial confession of accused need not in all cases be corroborated and there is no requirement that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated.

If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of Prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession with regard to the participation of the accused must be separately and independently corroborated.

 

 

Yogendra Singh Rajawat
Advocate, Jaipur
16678 Answers
21 Consultations

4.6 on 5.0

Hi, extra judicial confeesional is not really a strong piece of evidence however if it also corroborated by the prosecution evidence then it becomes a good evidence, depends on fact and circumstances of each case. There are cases wherein based on extra judicial confession conviction is made.

In case of audio recording , this recording will be sent to forensic department for authenticity, and thereafter it would be admitted.

 

kindly see the link below-

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/conviction-can-be-based-on-voluntary-extra-judicial-confession-sc/articleshow/66108865.cms

Varnika Singh
Advocate, Ghaziabad
261 Answers
2 Consultations

4.9 on 5.0

Extra judicial confession if voluntary and true can be a sufficient evidence for base of conviction of the accused but if the same is corroborated with some additional independent evidence, the role of prudence also gets thereby satisfied. 

Courtcan permit evidence to be taken on record 

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
71952 Answers
4324 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

See certainly court will allow it as secondary evidence to kept on record though how much court relies on it that has to be corobrated, in my view court can consider same and it can be relied if the facts and circumstances are being established.

Shubham Jhajharia
Advocate, Ahmedabad
22816 Answers
92 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

In case in no uncertain terms laid down that the evidentiary value of the extra judicial confessiondepends upon the veracity of the witnesses to whom it is made and it is for the Court to decide on the acceptability of the evidence having regard to the credibility of the witnesses.

 

In a case of State Of Punjab vs Gurdeep Singh on 8 September, 1999,  the high court negatived the finding that extra judicialconfession after long lapse of time is of no consequence. The High Court reminded itself that circumstantial evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence. The circumstances must be of such a nature and should form a complete chain as to be capable of supporting the exclusive hypothesis that the accused is guilty of the crime of which he is charged. There is no denial of the fact that extra judicial confession is admissible in evidence and the court in appropriate cases can rely thereon to the extent of even basing conviction of the accused. In a long catena of decisions of this Court, the settled position of the present day is that the extra judicial confession by itself if, otherwise in conformity with the law, can be treated as substantive evidence, and in appropriate cases it can be used to punish an offender.There must be some cogent reasons for making a confession of this nature.

 

 

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
61890 Answers
799 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

An extra judicial confession, if voluntary, can be relied upon by the Court along with other evidence in convicting the accused. The value of the evidence as to the confession depends upon the veracity of the witnesses to whom it is made. It is true that the Court requires the witness to give the actual words used by the accused as nearly as possible but it is not an invariable rule that the Court should not accept the evidence, if not the actual words but the substance were given. It is for the Court having regard to the credibility of the witness to accept the evidence or not. When the Court believes the witness before whom the confession is made and it is satisfied that the confession was voluntary, conviction can be founded on such evidence.

There is no doubt that convictions can be based on extra judicial confession but it is well settled that in the very nature of things, it is a weak piece of evidence. It is to be proved just like any other fact and the value thereof depends upon the veracity of the witness to whom it is made. It may not be necessary that the actual words used by the accused must be given by the witness but it is for the Court to decide on the acceptability of the evidence having regard to the credibility of the witnesses.

 

in the case of Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1988 SC 1705) in paragraph 11 it can be observed:

"On 10th August, 1985 FIR was lodged by Nihal Singh (PW2) and on 13.8.1985 the appellant went to Amrik Singh (PW

3) to make an extra judicial confession. Amrik Singh (PW 3) to make an extra- judicial confession. Amrik Singh says that the appellant told him that as the police was after him he had come and confessed the fact so that he might not be unnecessarily harassed. There is nothing to indicate that this Amrik Singh was a person having some influence with the police or a person of some status to protect the appellant from harassment. In his cross-examination he admits that he is neither the Lambardar or Sarpanch nor a person who is frequently visiting the police station. He further admits that when he produced the appellant there was a crowd of 10 to 12 persons. There is no other corroborative evidence about the extra-judicial confession. As rightly conceded by the learned counsel for the State that extra-judicial confession is a very weak piece of evidence and is hardly of any consequence. The council, however, mainly relied on motive, the evidence of last seen, the evidence of recovery of dead bodies and the conduct of the appellant in not making a report about the missing father and son."

The confession in the normal course of events are made to avoid harassment by the police and to a person who could otherwise protect the accused against such a harassment. The records in the present appeal do not reflect any one of these aspects. As such it is difficult to point to the accused with the crime on the basis of the evidence available in this case.

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
61890 Answers
799 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a lawyer