NIKA RAM vs THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

The Supreme Court held that a confession recorded by a second class Magistrate, who was not specially empowered under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is inadmissible as evidence, along with any oral testimony from that Magistrate regarding the confession. The Court reaffirmed the principles established in Singhara Singh's case and Nazir Ahmed's case, emphasizing that the confession was recorded during the investigation, thus invalidating its admissibility. Although the confession was excluded, the Court maintained the conviction based on other evidence, reducing the sentence from death to life imprisonment.