‘X’ was charged for committing murder of his wife. He wrote a letter, addressing the police inspector, that he himself has committed murder of his wife and he will surrender to the police after fifteen days. This letter was kept near the dead body of his wife and found by the sub-inspector of police. Is the letter admissible in evidence? Discuss.

Facts of the Case

• ‘X’ is charged with the murder of his wife.
• After the incident, X wrote a confessional letter addressed to the Police Inspector stating:
  • He himself had committed the murder of his wife.
  • He would surrender after 15 days.
• This letter was kept near the dead body of his wife.
• The letter was found and seized by the Sub-Inspector of Police during investigation.
• The prosecution seeks to produce the letter as evidence against X.
• The issue is whether this letter is admissible in evidence or hit by the prohibitions under the Indian Evidence Act.

Issues in the Case

1. Whether the confessional letter written by X amounts to a confession under the Evidence Act?
2. Whether a confession discovered by a police officer is admissible under Sections 25 and 26?
3. Whether the letter is hit by Section 25 (confession to police officer) even though it was not directly addressed to the Sub-Inspector?
4. Whether the recovery of the letter at the instance of police makes any part of the statement admissible under Section 27?
5. Whether a unilateral written confession left at the scene can be treated as voluntary or admissible?

Legal Principles Covered to Support Case Proceedings and Judgments

A. Section 25 – Confession to a Police Officer (Evidence Act)

No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.

• Even if the statement is written voluntarily, if it is addressed to the police or meant for informing the police, it is treated as a confession to police.
• A letter written to the police is covered under this prohibition.

B. Section 26 – Confession While in Police Custody

• Not applicable here because X was not in custody when he wrote the letter.
• However, combined reading of Sections 25 and 26 emphasises that the law prohibits any confession intended for police use.

C. Section 27 – Discovery of Fact

This section makes only that portion of a statement admissible which leads strictly and directly to the discovery of a fact.

• Here, the incriminating content of the letter did not lead to any discovery of material fact.
• The letter only contains a confession, not information that leads to discovery of the weapon or other evidence.
• Thus, Section 27 does not apply.

D. Section 162 CrPC – Statements to Police Not Signed

• Police cannot use statements or letters containing confession as evidence except for contradiction.

E. Case Law

1. Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 119)

• A confession, whether oral or written, is inadmissible if made to the police.

2. Queen Empress v. Babu Lal (1884)

• A confession intended to be communicated to the police is hit by Section 25.

3. State of Punjab v. Barkat Ram (1962 SC)

• Any statement addressed to police is inadmissible as a confession.

F. Whether the Letter is an “Anonymous Document” Recovered at Scene?

• Even if the police “found” the letter, its contents clearly show that:
  • It was addressed to police,
  • It was a confession meant for police,
    Thus Section 25 applies.

G. Voluntariness Does Not Cure Inadmissibility

• Even a fully voluntary confession becomes inadmissible if made to a police officer or intended for a police officer.

Possible Judgment

A. The Letter is NOT Admissible as Evidence

The court will likely hold that:

1. The letter is a confession intended for the police.
2. Under Section 25, such confession is completely barred from being admitted in evidence.
3. The fact that the Sub-Inspector “found” the letter does not make it admissible; it remains a confession meant for police authorities.
4. The letter does not result in any discovery of fact; hence Section 27 does not apply.
5. The prosecution cannot rely on the contents of the letter as substantive evidence.

**B. Investigative Recovery ≠ Legal Admissibility

The letter’s recovery from the scene does not bypass the prohibition under Section 25.

About lawgnan

If you want deeper clarity on how courts interpret res gestae, child witness statements, or evidentiary rules in sensitive offences, explore detailed expert legal resources, case digests, and law-based explanations on Lawgana.in. Whether you are a law student, advocate, judicial aspirant, or a person seeking legal understanding, Lawgana.in provides simplified legal insights, structured case analyses, and practical guides based on the Indian Evidence Act and leading Supreme Court judgments. Visit Lawgana.in today to strengthen your legal knowledge, stay updated, and access reliable law content for study, litigation, or research purposes.