DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADMISSION AND CONFESSION UNDER INDIAN EVIDENCE LAW

The present article discusses the distinction between the Admission and Confession under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The present article will elaborate on admission in evidence act as well as confession in evidence act. Before distinction of these two their meaning, relevance and evidentiary value is also being discussed.

ADMISSION in Evidence Act

Section 17 to 23, specifically deals with the portions related to admission, in evidence act.

As per the section 17 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872:

“An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances mentioned in the act.

Admissions can be either formal or informal.The formal admission is also called as judicial admission which is made at the time of the judicial proceeding, while the informal admission is those admissions which are made in during the normal day to day activity like in the normal course of life. Formal admission or the judicial admissions are completely admissible by the Court of law under Section 58 of the same act and has much higher probative value into substantive any fact. They are generally rebuttable in nature and require no further proof to disprove the facts admitted in a court of law unless the court asks for the same.

ADMISSION IN EVIDENCE ACT, WHEN RELEVANT (SEC 18-20)

An Admission is relevant if it is made by:

A party to the proceeding;
An agent authorized by such party.
A party suing or being sued in a representative character making admission while holding such character.
A person who has a proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest.
A person from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit during the continuance of such interest. (Section 18)
A person whose position it is necessary to prove in a suit, if such statements would be relevant in a suit brought by against himself (Section 19.)
A person to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in Dispute (Section 20.)

EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF ADMISSION

An admission is the best evidence against the party making the same unless it is untrue and made under the circumstances, which does not make it binding on him. Admission by a party is substantive evidence of the facts admitted by him. Admissions duly proved have evidence value of evidentiary value admission irrespective of whether the party making the admission appeared in the Witness box or not. In fact, Admission is best substantive evidence that an opposite party can rely upon it. The evidentiary value of admission only by government is merely relevant and not conclusive, unless the Party to whom they are made has acted upon and thus altered his detriment.

CONFESSION

The term ‘confession’ is nowhere defined or expressed in the Indian Evidence Act, but the inference explained under the definition of admission in Section 17 of Indian evidence Act also applies to confession in the same manner.

Thus, the confession is something which is made by the person who is charged with any criminal offences and such statements conferred by him shall be suggesting a conclusion as to any fact in issue or as to relevant facts. We may also define the confession in other words that the admission by the accused in the criminal proceedings is a confession.

A confession may be of the different type according to the matter of the cases. Broadly confession is differentiated into two different statuses like- when the confession by the means of statements is given itself in the court of law then such confession will be considered as judicial confession, whereas, when the confession by the way of statements is produced at any place other than court then such confession will lead towards extrajudicial confession.

CONFESSION WHEN BECOMES IRRELEVANT

Sections 24, 25, 26 and relevant part of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with condition that when can confession be irrelevant.Section 24 of Indian Evidence Act provides that a confession made by a person who is accused of some offence is irrelevant if such confession comes out of any inducement, threat or promise and such instances have proceeded from a person in authority like police, magistrate, court etc .As per section 24 the confession becomes irrelevant:

As a result of inducement, threat or promise;
Inducement, etc be made from a person in authority;
It should relate to a charge in question; and
It should hold out some worldly benefit or advantage.

EVIDENTIARY VALUE

Though it is presumed that a person will not make a false statement which can be used against him as evidence, yet confession is considered as a weak type of evidence. Its evidentiary value is very less since there are chances that it can be untrue due to the state of mind of accused or may be influenced by force or under threat etc. Hence, they must be considered in collaboration with other evidence on the record. A court must as a matter of prudence resist from convicting a person solely on the basis of a confession. They must be taken into account in light of the facts and circumstances of the case.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADMISSION AND CONFESSION IN EVIDENCE ACT

The principle difference between admission and confession are as follows:

Since, the definition of admission is also applicable to that of confession and confession comes under the topic of ‘admission,’ it can be inferred that admission is a broader term and it covers confessions. Hence, all confessions are admissions but not all admissions are confessions.

An admission can either be in favor or against the interest of the party making it whereas a confession is always against the interest of the party making it.

A confession is binding on the co-accused, whereas this is not the case in admissions.

An admission can be made by a third party, too but confession proceeds from a person who has committed the crime

Admission is not a conclusive proof but a confession is taken to be a satisfactory proof of guilt of the accused.

DISTINCTION (Difference Between Admission and Confession in Evidence Act) in Bullets

	ADMISSION	CONFESSION
A)	If a statement is made by a party in civil proceeding it will be called as admission	If a statement made by a party charged with crime, in criminal proceeding, it is called as a confession
B)	The expression ‘Admission’ means“ voluntary acknowledgement of the existence or truth of a particular fact”	The expression ‘Confession’ means “a statement made by an accused admitting his guilt. If a person accused of an offense (accused) makes a statement against him, it is called confession.
C)	The Term Admission is applicable to a statement, oral or in writing made by a party on civil side.	Confession is the term for admission of guilt made in the criminal side.
D)	An admission is not conclusive proof of the matters admitted and is always rebuttable.	An admission is not conclusive proof of the matters admitted and is always rebuttable.
E)	An admission may be proved by or behalf of the person making it.	But confession always goes against the person making it.
F)	An admission may be made by an agent in course of business.	While an agent can never make the confession of an offense against a co-defendant.
G)	Admission by one of the several defendants in suit is not evidence against other defendants.	Confession made by one or two or more accused jointly tried for the same offense can be taken into consideration against the co-accused.
H)	Retraction is not possible in Admission.	Retraction is possible in Confession.
I)	Admission is a genus	Confession is specie hence all confessions are admissions but all admissions are not confessions.
J)	Admission can be either in favor or against the party making it	Confession is always against the party making it.

Difference Between Admission And Confession In Evidence (Act) Law