Inadmissible police confession and no false charge during investigation: conviction under Section 211 IPC unsustainable, appellant acquitted.

Confessions made to a police officer are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, and that prohibition is absolute; the prosecution could not rely on the Circle Inspector's account of the alleged confession to prove the sending of the telegram. Statements made during an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 do not amount to a "charge" for Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code, and a mere expression of suspicion during investigation is insufficient to constitute false criminal charge. The conviction was therefore unsustainable and the appellant was acquitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 could be sustained on the basis of the alleged telegram and the statement made during the inquest investigation, and whether the material relied upon was admissible in evidence.

Analysis: Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 renders a confession made to a police officer inadmissible, and the prohibition is absolute. The prosecution could not rely on the Circle Inspector's account of the alleged confession to prove that the telegram was sent. Further, statements made in the course of an investigation under Chapter XIV of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 are not a "charge" within the meaning of Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A mere statement expressing suspicion during investigation does not amount to instituting a false criminal charge.

Conclusion: The conviction was unsustainable and the appellant was acquitted.

---