Statement must be voluntary as well as true :
It must not only be established that statement is voluntary but also it must be established that the statement is true. For purpose of establishing the truth, it is necessary to examine the confession and compare it with rest of the evidence on record – Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab – AIR 1957 SC 637. Confession, before relied upon, must be established to have been made voluntarily and true – Mohabir Biswas v. State of WB – (1995) 2 SCC 25 (3 member bench).
If a statement is not true, that cannot be used even if the same were confessional in nature because the settled law is that for a confession to be used against the maker in criminal case, the same has to be both true and voluntary. – State of Haryana v. Rajinder Singh – (1996) 2 SCALE 488. In K L Pavunny v. ACCE 1997(3) SCC 721 = 18 RLT 641 = 90 ELT 241 (SC 3 member bench) also, it was held that the statement must be voluntary and true. In Sahib Singh v. State of Haryana 1997 AIR SCW 3306 = 1997(7) SCC 231 = AIR 1997 SC 3247, it was observed – ‘Before a conviction can be based on ‘confession’, it has to be shown that it was truthful’.
Statement must be voluntary – Statement should be voluntary. If it appears to be by inducement, threat or coercion, it has to be outright rejected – KTMS Mohammed v. UOI AIR 1992 SC 1831 = (1992) 3 SCC 178 = 197 ITR 196 = 1992 AIR SCW 2062 = 65 Taxman 130 (SC) * Vinod Solanki v. UOI (2009) 92
SCL 157 = 233 ELT 157 (SC) * Galaxy Indo Fab v. CCE (2010) 258 ELT 254 (CESTAT).
Statement made must be voluntary and true. It may not be relied upon if it is untrue on material particulars. Similarly, statement obtained under inducement, threat or promise is hit by section 24 of Evidence Act and is not admissible. – Sevantilal Karsondas Modi v. State of Maharashtra – AIR 1979 SC 705 = 109 ELT 41, followed in Sajjan Kumar Poddar v. CC (Prev) – 1992 (58) ELT 283 (CEGAT). * Debu Saha v. CC (Prev) – 1992 (59) ELT 442 (CEGAT).
Statement should be accepted after scrutiny – In Haroon Haji Abdulla v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1968 SC 832 = (1968) 2 SCR 641 = 110 ELT 309, Hon. Supreme Court had held that the statement is not made subject to safeguards under which confessions are recorded by Magistrate. Hence, these must be specially scrutinised to find if they were voluntary.