Non-compliance with provisions of section 183 or section 316
AI Assist
Summary
When a court is asked to admit a confession or other statement recorded (or said to be recorded) by a magistrate under sections 183 or 316 and finds the magistrate did not follow the required procedure, the court may take evidence about that non-compliance. If satisfied that the lapse did not injure the accused's defence on the merits and that the accused actually made the statement, the court may still admit it. This power also applies to courts of appeal, reference and revision.
Example
Ravi told a magistrate he broke into a shop, but the magistrate skipped a required formal caution and recording step. At trial the judge examines witnesses about the omission, is convinced the lapse did not harm Ravi's defence and that Ravi did make the statement, and therefore admits the confession in evidence.
Bare Act
Enacted text(1) If any Court before which a confession or other statement of an accused person recorded, or purporting to be recorded under section 183 or section 316, is tendered, or has been received, in evidence finds that any of the provisions of either of such sections have not been complied with by the Magistrate recording the statement, it may, notwithstanding anything contained in section 94 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, take evidence in regard to such non-compliance, and may, if satisfied that such non-compliance has not injured the accused in his defence on the merits and that he duly made the statement recorded, admit such statement.
(2) The provisions of this section apply to Courts of appeal, reference and revision.
Previous year papers
Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.