Section 162 CrPC: Statements to Police Not to Be Signed and Use in Evidence

Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 governed the signing and evidentiary use of statements made to police during investigation. This article explains the law applicable under the CrPC before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force.

Meaning and object of Section 162 CrPC

Section 162 CrPC placed restrictions on statements made by a person to a police officer during an investigation under Chapter XII of the Code. If such a statement was reduced to writing, the person making it was not required or permitted by this provision to sign it. The section also restricted the use of that statement at an inquiry or trial relating to the offence that was under investigation when the statement was made.

The provision should be read with Section 161 CrPC, which dealt with examination of witnesses by police. Section 162 primarily controlled how a statement obtained in that investigative process could later be used.

Section 162 CrPC - Legal provision

Is a statement made to police under Section 162 CrPC to be signed?

No. Where a statement made to a police officer during investigation was reduced to writing, Section 162(1) expressly provided that it was not to be signed by the person making it. This rule concerned statements made during investigation and should not be confused with statements or confessions recorded by a Magistrate under other provisions of the Code.

Can a police statement be used as evidence?

A statement covered by Section 162 was not ordinarily substantive evidence of the facts stated in it. Its use was restricted by the section. The principal permitted use at trial was contradiction of a prosecution witness, subject to the statutory procedure and proof requirements. The prosecution could use the statement for contradiction only with the permission of the Court.

When a portion of the earlier statement was properly used for contradiction, another relevant portion could be referred to in re-examination, but only for explaining a matter arising from the cross-examination. The section therefore imposed a controlled and limited evidentiary use rather than treating the police statement as ordinary proof of its contents.

Exceptions under Section 162(2) CrPC

Section 162(2) preserved two important rules under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. First, it did not exclude a statement falling within Section 32(1), which covered specified statements by a person who was dead or otherwise unavailable, including statements relating to the cause of death in circumstances covered by that provision. Second, Section 162 did not affect Section 27 of the Evidence Act concerning the limited admissibility of information received from an accused in police custody to the extent distinctly related to a fact thereby discovered.

When can an omission amount to a contradiction?

The Explanation to Section 162 recognized that contradiction was not confined to an express inconsistent statement. An omission in the police statement could amount to a contradiction when the omitted fact or circumstance was significant and relevant having regard to the context. Whether the omission was sufficiently material to constitute a contradiction depended on the facts of the case.

Related provisions under the CrPC

Position after 1 July 2024

For the current procedural law, the corresponding provision is Section 181 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, titled "Statements to police and use thereof." The core rule that a statement to police, if reduced to writing, is not to be signed is carried forward, while references to the evidence law are updated to the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.

Practical summary of Section 162 CrPC

Note: This page explains the statutory position under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before implementation of the BNSS. Application to a particular investigation or trial may depend on the date of proceedings, transitional provisions and case-specific facts.