Ad Code

Recent Posts


Athumani s/o Kassim v. R., Crim. App. 923-D-67, 12/2/68, Biron J.

Athumani s/o Kassim v. R., Crim. App. 923-D-67, 12/2/68, Biron J.

Accused was convicted of stealing by public servant. There was evidence that the stolen local rate stamps were found in the possession of accused during a search of the office staff made under the supervision of the Divisional Executive Officer. Accused then confessed to the Divisional Executive Officer, and led a messenger to his house where he disclosed other stolen stamps. The trial court refused to admit the confession but permitted  the production of the stamps found on accused.

            Held: “(O)n a comparison of [section 29 of the Evidence Act, 1967] with the repealed section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, the door has now been opened much wider for the admission of confessions.” The confession to the Divisional Executive Officer was admissible under the new section. The Court stated, obiter, that the confession would also have been admissible under the repealed section 24 because there was no indication that it had been obtained as a result of any inducement, threat or promise. Appeal summarily rejected. 

Post a Comment