Shivappa v State of Karnataka
AIR 1995 SC 980; (1995) 2 SCC 7619941 min read
The case in brief30-second read
- Facts
- The appellant was convicted of murder by the trial court and the High Court on the sole basis of his confession recorded under S.164 CrPC.
- Issue
- Whether the confession was recorded with the safeguards required by S.164 and could found a conviction.
- Held
- Full compliance, in essence and not just in form, with S.164 and the High Court rules is imperative. The Magistrate must enquire about the custody and treatment of the accused, give sufficient time for reflection free of police influence, ask why he wants to confess, and assure him he will not be remanded to police custody if he declines. These safeguards were not observed; as the confession was the only evidence, the conviction and sentence were set aside.
- Principle
- A Magistrate recording a confession must make a searching enquiry about custody and treatment, give time for reflection free of police influence, and assure the accused he will not be remanded to police custody if he declines
Facts
- The appellant was convicted of murder by the trial court and the High Court on the sole basis of his confession recorded under S.164 CrPC.
Issue
- Whether the confession was recorded with the safeguards required by S.164 and could found a conviction.
Held
- Full compliance, in essence and not just in form, with S.164 and the High Court rules is imperative. The Magistrate must enquire about the custody and treatment of the accused, give sufficient time for reflection free of police influence, ask why he wants to confess, and assure him he will not be remanded to police custody if he declines. These safeguards were not observed; as the confession was the only evidence, the conviction and sentence were set aside.
Ratio decidendi
Non-compliance with S.164 safeguards makes the confession unworthy of credence.
Exam use
How to use it in an answer
Lead case on reflection time and voluntariness under S.183 BNSS.
Cite this
Citation
Shivappa v State of Karnataka AIR 1995 SC 980; (1995) 2 SCC 76Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/747496/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.