Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Accused making two statements, Admissibility of second statement. Two state- ments by accused regarding place of concealment. If the information derived as a result of in- terrogation was merely vague and the precise information was received as a result of the statement made by the accused before the DSP and witnesses, the subsequent statement would be admissible in evidence. Likewise if the previous statement made to the investigating officer merely indicated a willingness of the accused to disclose where the incriminating articles were lying and the actual information about that place was given in subsequent statement the subsequent statement is admissible if the incriminating articles are recovered in pursuance of the statement. Statements to police made by a second accused are not admissible in evidence when the police already know about if from the 1st accused. Further, it is the first statement of the accused to whomsoever made, that leads to the discovery of the fact if a fact is discovered. Therefore, if the accused repeats his statement to another police officer and points out the place of burial of the person murdered it cannot be said that there is a discovery of that place pursuant to the information the accused gave to that officer. Hence, such a statement is not admissible in evidence.