Site navigation

While in police custody, an accused is taken to a government doctor. He voluntarily tells the doctor…

A statement that the deceased inflicted the injury may be incriminating without admitting the offence. The Supreme Court drew that distinction in Kanda Padayachi v. State of…

Choose your answer

While in police custody, an accused is taken to a government doctor. He voluntarily tells the doctor that the deceased caused an injury to his body on the night of the death, without admitting that he committed the offence. Can the doctor testify to that relevant statement under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer D

A statement that the deceased inflicted the injury may be incriminating without admitting the offence. The Supreme Court drew that distinction in Kanda Padayachi v. State of Tamil Nadu.

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam permits proof of relevant admissions against their makers under section 19. The police-custody rule in section 23(2) applies to confessions.

Option feedback

Option A

Section 23(2) governs confessions in police custody. It does not exclude every custodial statement.

Option B

Identifying who caused the injury does not admit the offence or substantially all its essential facts.

Option C

A voluntary relevant admission may be proved against its maker under section 19, subject to applicable exclusions.

Option D

The doctor may prove the statement as an admission. Its incriminating tendency does not make it a confession.

Practice for these exams

Related question papers

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic