Correct option is D
The statement regarding the definition of a 'Confession' under the Indian Evidence Act was expressed by the Privy Council in the case of Pakla Narayan Swamy vs. Emperor. In this landmark case, the Privy Council clarified that a confession, to be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, must acknowledge guilt or admit to substantially all the facts that constitute the offense. This means that for a statement to be considered a confession, it should clearly indicate the involvement of the accused in the crime either by admitting to the offense or by acknowledging all the crucial facts necessary for the offense.
Information Booster:
· Pakla Narayan Swamy vs. Emperor (1939): This case is one of the most significant decisions related to the law of confessions in India. The Privy Council in this case provided an authoritative definition of what constitutes a confession under the Indian Evidence Act. It established that a confession must be clear and unambiguous in admitting the commission of a crime or acknowledging the facts that make up the crime.
Additional Knowledge:
· Q.E. vs. Abdullah: This case is less frequently cited in the context of confessions and is not the one where the above view was expressed.
· John Makin vs. Attorney General: This is an Australian case and does not relate directly to the interpretation of the Indian Evidence Act on confessions.
· H.H.B. Gill vs. King Emperor: This case deals with a different aspect of criminal law and does not provide the definition of a confession as discussed in the given statement.
