Section 22: Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding

Earlier law: Evidence Act section 24, section 28, section 29

In plain words

A confession by an accused is irrelevant in a criminal case if it appears to have been caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise about the charge, coming from a person in authority, that would make the accused reasonably think confessing would gain an advantage or avoid harm in the proceedings.

It becomes relevant if made after the effect of the inducement or threat was fully removed.
An otherwise relevant confession is not made irrelevant just because it was given under a promise of secrecy, through deception, while drunk, in answer to questions, or without a warning that it could be used as evidence.

A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.

Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓

Official text

A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him:

Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant:

Provided further that if such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him.

Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.

Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 25 August 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.

Understanding this section

Section 22 carries forward section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, and adds the word coercion: a confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise from a person in authority, relating to the charge, is irrelevant. Its provisos absorb the old sections 28 and 29.

What changed

Coercion is now expressly listed alongside inducement, threat and promise.
The first proviso (old section 28): a confession becomes relevant if made after the impression of the inducement has been fully removed.
The second proviso (old section 29): an otherwise relevant confession is not excluded merely because of a promise of secrecy, deception, drunkenness, or absence of a warning.

Test

It is enough that the improper influence appears to the court to have caused the confession, and that it would give the accused reasonable grounds to expect a worldly advantage or to avoid an evil in the proceedings.

Common mistakes

Looking for old sections 28 and 29 separately; they are now provisos to section 22.

Read with: Section 23 BSA, Section 24 Evidence Act

Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.

Supreme Court judgments citing the section 22

No Supreme Court judgment in our database cites this section yet.