Indian Evidence Law • Updated 20 October 2026
Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act: Confession After Inducement, Threat or Promise Is Removed
Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 explained when a confession could become relevant after the influence of an earlier inducement, threat or promise had been fully removed. For proceedings governed by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), this principle appears in the first proviso to Section 22.
What did Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 provide?
The provision stated:
If such a confession as is referred to in section 24 is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant.
In simple terms, an earlier improper inducement did not automatically make every later confession inadmissible. The court had to be satisfied that the earlier influence was fully removed before the later confession was made.
Current law: First proviso to Section 22 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 22 deals with a confession caused by an inducement, threat, coercion or promise linked to the accusation, proceeding from a person in authority and giving the accused reasonable grounds to expect a benefit or avoid a temporal disadvantage. Such a confession is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding.
The first proviso to Section 22 provides that a confession made after the impression caused by that inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the court's opinion, been fully removed is relevant. The current statute expressly includes coercion in addition to inducement, threat and promise.
Read the official text: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (India Code PDF).
Conditions for relying on a later confession
- Earlier influence: There was an inducement, threat, coercion or promise of the kind contemplated by Section 22.
- Full removal: The court is satisfied on the evidence that its effect on the accused had entirely ended.
- Subsequent confession: The confession was made only after that influence was removed.
- Other admissibility rules: The confession must also satisfy the remaining legal requirements. Removal of pressure does not override the separate restrictions on confessions to police officers or in police custody.
How does the court assess whether the impression was removed?
The question is factual and depends on the circumstances. Relevant considerations may include the passage of time, withdrawal of the threat or promise, a genuine change in surroundings, whether the accused was free from the earlier person's influence, and the circumstances in which the later statement was recorded. No fixed waiting period alone establishes that the impression was fully removed.
Practical example
Suppose an accused person is told by an authority figure that confessing will secure release. A confession made while that promise still influences the accused may be excluded. If the promise is clearly withdrawn and the court finds its effect was fully removed before a later confession, the first proviso to BSA Section 22 may become relevant. However, if the later confession was made to a police officer, the separate bar under BSA Section 23 must still be considered.
Related provisions and safeguards
BSA Section 23: Generally prohibits proof of confessions made to police officers against an accused and addresses confessions while in police custody, with specified exceptions and a narrowly defined discovery-related proviso.
BNSS Section 183: Governs recording of confessions and statements by a Magistrate, including procedural safeguards. A Magistrate-recorded confession must comply with applicable requirements; the first proviso to BSA Section 22 does not by itself validate an improperly recorded statement.
BSA Section 170: Contains repeal and savings provisions. Pending trials, inquiries, investigations, proceedings or appeals immediately before commencement are subject to the statutory savings rule.
Official legislative references: BSA, 2023 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Frequently asked questions
Is Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act still in force?
The 1872 Act has been repealed with effect from 1 July 2024, subject to statutory savings. The corresponding rule for new proceedings is found in the first proviso to Section 22 of the BSA, 2023.
Does the passage of time automatically make a confession admissible?
No. The court must be satisfied that the earlier inducement, threat, coercion or promise no longer influenced the accused.
Can a later confession to a police officer be proved if the threat has ended?
Not merely for that reason. The independent prohibition under BSA Section 23 still applies.
This article explains the general statutory position and is not a substitute for advice on the facts of a particular case.