proof of document:admission of accused

Admissions are not applicable to criminal trail. Only cofession that too with limitaitons of 163 cr.P.C, 27 EA etc is admissible. In 313 only incriminating facts, circumstances and evidence needs to be asked.

Prosecution has to prove its case first. Then the questioning of accused U/s 313. Prosecution is unable to know the stand of the accused whether he will admit the dicument in 313 or not. So they prove their case first with their evidence. After 313 there is defence evidence if any. there after argument and then judgment.

You may kindly enlighten yourself  that 313 has no bearing against accused case as it is not on oath. It cannot be used against him evenif it is false no action is possible.

This is an imp section which cannot be slurred over.

 

Admission   is    always in  civil   cases.  In   cr.  cases   confession    of   an   accused    can'  be    treated    as  evidence   against    himself.

Sir,there may be a situation when an innocent accused may confess his guilt under some compulsion or undue pressure or to save the person who is actually guilty.This is why the prosecution is asked to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts.

thanks  with a note--1)admission by an accuded in criminal proceeding goes by the name of "confession" n s devasthanam vs p swaminatha Pillai AIR 1958 mad502.2 )i have gone through the s 313crpc.some controversy in the proviso--when in summons case personal appearence is dispensed with  then how there will be sufficient  compliance of the section?

313 Cr.P.C can be complied only if there are incriminating circumstances, facts and evidenbce against the accused. Personal aoppearence is dispensed genrally not in trial. In cases there is no question of identification or identification not disputed there is no need of the accused in the court. The dispensing of the accused is subject to condition by the court.