Section 24: Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence

Corresponding Evidence Act provision

As given in the correspondence table of the National Crime Records Bureau (Ministry of Home Affairs). Read both texts before relying on it. NCRB table

Leading cases

• State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005)Decided on Evidence Act section 30In the Parliament attack case the Court held a POTA confession inadmissible against co-accused, upheld Mohd. Afzal's conviction and death sentence, convicted Shaukat only under Section 123 IPC, and upheld the acquittals of S.A.R. Gilani and Afsan Guru.

Questions on this section

7 questions in 26 of our papers cite Section 24. Try these from the free papers:

1. 1. Under Explanation II to Section 24 of the BSA, a trial of more persons than one held in the absence of an accused who has absconded, or who fails to comply with a proclamation issued under Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023:

   A.shall not be treated as a joint trial for the purpose of Section 24B.shall be deemed to be a joint trial for the purpose of Section 24C.makes the confession of a co-accused conclusive proof against the absconding accusedD.shall be deemed to be a joint trial only if the absconding accused had himself confessed
   Show answer

2. 2. Regarding the use of a confession of a co-accused (now governed by Section 24 of the BSA), the Supreme Court in Kashmira Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1952) laid down that:

   A.the confession is substantive evidence on which alone a conviction of the co-accused can be basedB.the confession cannot be taken into consideration at all against a co-accusedC.the confession can be used against a co-accused only if it was made to a police officerD.the Court should first weigh the other evidence and may use the confession only to lend assurance to it
   Show answer

3. 3. Consider the following statements with reference to Section 24 of the BSA: 1. The confession of an accused can be taken into consideration against a co-accused only when both are being tried jointly for the same offence. 2. If B, who is not being tried jointly with A, says "A and I murdered C", that statement may be taken into consideration against A at A's trial for the murder of C. 3. For the purposes of the section, "offence" includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, the offence. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

   A.1 and 3 onlyB.3 onlyC.1 onlyD.1, 2 and 3
   Show answer