by Police - Bureau of Police Research and Development

The Indian Police Journalconducive for making voluntary statement. In case of Tahsildar Singhv. State of U.P. AIR 1959 SC 1012, the Supreme Court observed:“The intention of Legislature in framing S.162 in the manner itstatements of witnesses made before police during investigationat the trial presumably on the assumption that the said statementthe sections and proviso intended to serve primarily the samepurpose, i.e. the interest of the accused.”Sec.161 and Sec.162 Cr.P.C. both provisions attempt to protect theaccused against abuse of police power. Sec.161(2) provides Rightto Refuse and Right to Silence against incriminating questions andprohibits compelled testimony. Sec.162 protects accused by makingprovision that statement given u/s 161 cannot be used during trial orwill not use third degree methods for obtaining such statements.But this prohibition is applicable only for trial or inquiry of the caseduring investigation of which this statement was made as in Sec.162(1)“… at any inquiry or trial in respect of any offenceunder investigation at the time when statement was made….” meansstatement u/s 161 Cr.P.C. given in one case may be used in trial ofany other case. In such situation, prohibition of non-user of statementwould not apply. In case of Vinay D. Nagar v. State of Rajasthan AIR2008 SC 1558, deceased person was star witness in an abduction casestatement. He was crucial witness and eyewitness of the case, therefore,prosecution tried to produce statement of witness given in previouscase that was in abduction case. It was opposed by defence side. TheCourt observed that prohibition given in Sec.162(1) is applicable forthe same case in which statement was given, not for another case:“Bar of Sec.162 Cr.P.C. of proving the statement recorded by shall not apply to any statement falling within the provision ofclause (1) of Sec. 32 of Evidence Act. Bar of Sec. 162 Cr.P.C. isin regard to admissibility of the statement recorded of a person Sec. 162 Cr.P.C. would be applicable only where such statementis sought to be used at any inquiry or trial in respect of anyJanuary - March, 2013129