https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469743 Confessional statements were treated as inadmissible under Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act because they appeared to have been made under inducement from a person in authority, namely a promise to avoid prosecution in return for repayment of bank money. Once excluded, the prosecution was left with hostile testimony, suspicious circumstances, and no expert proof of the alleged forged signatures. That remaining material was insufficient to prove criminal breach of trust, forgery, use of forged documents, or falsification of accounts beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction could not be sustained and acquittal followed. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jul 2026 14:36:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469743 Confessional statements were treated as inadmissible under Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act because they appeared to have been made under inducement from a person in authority, namely a promise to avoid prosecution in return for repayment of bank money. Once excluded, the prosecution was left with hostile testimony, suspicious circumstances, and no expert proof of the alleged forged signatures. That remaining material was insufficient to prove criminal breach of trust, forgery, use of forged documents, or falsification of accounts beyond reasonable doubt, so the conviction could not be sustained and acquittal followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469743