Non-compliance with provisions of section 164 or section 281
AI Assist
Summary
When a court is asked to admit a confession or other statement previously recorded by a Magistrate and it finds the Magistrate did not follow the required procedures, the court can take fresh evidence about that non-compliance. If the court is satisfied the lapse did not prejudice the accused’s defence and that the accused did make the statement, it may still admit the statement in evidence. This power extends to courts of appeal, reference and revision.
Example
Ravi gave a statement to a Magistrate but the Magistrate did not follow all the required formalities. The trial court can take evidence about that lapse and, if satisfied the lapse did not prejudice Ravi’s defence and that he truly made the statement, may admit it 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 164 or section 281, 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 91 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), 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.