Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court recently ruled that the statements made by one accused in an FIR cannot be used against another accused.

“The legal position, therefore, is this – a statement contained in the FIR furnished by one of the accused in the case cannot, in any manner, be used against another accused. Even as against the accused who made it, the statement cannot be used if it is inculpatory in nature nor can it be used for the purpose of corroboration or contradiction unless its maker offers himself as a witness in the trial.”, the court said.

The bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan reiterated this observation while hearing the case where the accused was convicted for the offence of murder based on the confessional FIR made by him.

The Court set aside the accused's conviction, noting that the FIR of a confessional nature was hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1972, making the contents of the FIR inadmissible against the maker, and further noted that even an FIR of a confessional nature cannot be used against the co-accused.

In support, the case of Faddi v. State of MP (1964) was cited, which laid down the principle that confessional FIRs cannot be used against the maker when he is an accused and necessarily cannot be used against a co-accused.

Further, taking reference from the case of Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar (1965), the Court stated that when the confessional FIR contains both the exculpatory and inculpatory statements and it is not possible to sift the exculpatory portion, the whole of it must be excluded from evidence.

Cause Title: NARAYAN YADAV VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 771

Click here to read/download the judgment

Also From Judgment: FIR Of Confessional Nature Made By Accused Not Substantive Evidence Of Guilt By Itself: Supreme Court