Cooperation with Investigation Does Not Require Accused to Confess : SC

Cooperation with Investigation Does Not Require Accused to Confess : SC

The Supreme Court has clarified that cooperating with an investigation does not necessitate that the accused must confess to the investigating officer.

"We are of the firm opinion that non-cooperation by the accused is one matter and the accused refusing to confess to the crime is another. There would be no obligation upon the accused that on being interrogated, he must confess to the crime and only thereafter, would the Investigating Officer be satisfied that the accused has cooperated with the investigation," the Court observed.

In a judgment, a bench led by Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta made key observations, finding a police inspector and a magistrate guilty of contempt of court. This ruling was based on their arrest and remand of an accused in violation of an interim anticipatory bail order issued by the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, the Magistrate argued that the police sought the custody remand of the accused on the grounds that he was not "cooperating" with the investigation. It was in response to this argument that the judgment included the aforementioned observations.

"The 6th ACJM(contemnor-respondent No.7) has laid much stress in her affidavit upon the fact that the Investigating Officer had noted in his application that the accused-petitioner was not cooperating with the investigation. We fail to comprehend as to what could be construed to be cooperation in a criminal case based on allegations which prima facie appear to be in relation to a civil dispute," the Court commented.

The Court highlighted that any confession made by the accused to a police officer is inadmissible as evidence and cannot be included in the record. The judgment also referenced the recent order in *Sanju Bansal v. State of Uttar Pradesh*, which established that confessional statements cannot be incorporated into the chargesheet.

CASE TITLE: TUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT, SLP(Crl) No. 14489/2023, TUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAH vs. KAMAL DAYANI Diary No.- 1106 – 2024

Click here to Read/Download the Judgement

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy