Confession of a Co-Accused in a Joint Trial Under the BSA (Section 24): Evidence Act 30 Mapping (2026)
When the confession of one accused can be used against a co-accused in the same trial under Section 24 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, how it maps to Section 30 of the old Evidence Act, and the new rule for absconders. Last verified October 2026.
Explainer · Evidence Law · BSA
One accused confesses, and the confession names a co-accused who is being tried in the same case. Can the court use that confession against the person who did not confess. The law allows it, but only in a narrow way, and with a strong warning attached, because a confession that blames someone else is easy to make and hard to test. Section 24 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 from 1 July 2024, governs this. This explainer sets out when a co-accused confession can be considered, how Section 24 maps to the old Section 30, and the new rule for absconders. Last verified October 2026.
- What it allows: in a joint trial for the same offence, the court may take a proved confession of one accused into consideration against a co-accused, where it affects both.
- Its weight: it is not substantive evidence and cannot by itself support a conviction. It needs corroboration.
- New rule: a trial held in the absence of an absconder under BNSS Section 84 is deemed a joint trial for this section.
- A limit: a confession the law excludes, like one to the police, cannot be revived against a co-accused.
- Old to new: BSA Section 24 replaces Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act.
01The problem with a co-accused confession
A confession by an accused is strong evidence against that person, because people do not usually admit guilt lightly. The trouble starts when the confession also blames someone else. The co-accused did not make the statement, cannot cross-examine the maker in the usual way, and may be the easy target of a confession designed to shift blame.
So the law takes a careful middle path. It does not ignore such a confession, but it does not treat it as full proof either. Section 24 lets the court take it into consideration against the co-accused, under tight conditions, and courts have long insisted it needs support from other evidence.
02What the rule is
The rule on the confession of a co-accused lets a court, in a joint trial for the same offence, take into consideration a proved confession of one accused against another, where the confession affects both of them.
A co-accused confession can be taken into consideration, but it is not substantive evidence, and it cannot by itself support a conviction.
The careful words are "take into consideration". The confession is not, by itself, substantive evidence against the co-accused. It is a supporting factor the court can weigh alongside the real evidence.
03Section 24: the conditions
Section 24 of the BSA applies only when several conditions are met:
- Joint trial: more than one person must be tried together, in the same trial.
- Same offence: they must be tried for the same offence. For this purpose, the offence includes the abetment of, or an attempt to commit, the offence.
- Proved confession: the confession must be proved.
- Affects both: the confession must affect the maker and the co-accused alike.
Only then may the court take the confession into consideration against the co-accused. If any condition fails, for example if the person who confessed is not jointly tried, the confession cannot be used against the other.
04The weight of such a confession
Even where Section 24 applies, the confession carries limited weight. Two long standing points matter.
- Not substantive evidence: a co-accused confession is not substantive evidence against the co-accused. It is something the court may take into consideration, not a primary proof.
- Needs corroboration: a conviction should not rest on such a confession alone. Courts have treated it as a factor that can lend assurance to other evidence, not as a stand alone basis for conviction.
A further limit matters. A confession that the law excludes, such as a confession to a police officer, cannot be brought back in against a co-accused through Section 24. For that rule, see confession to police under BSA Section 23.
05The new rule for absconders
The BSA adds something the old Section 30 did not have. An explanation to Section 24 provides that a trial of more than one person, held in the absence of an accused who has absconded, or who has failed to comply with a proclamation issued under Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is deemed to be a joint trial for the purpose of this section.
The effect is that an absconder’s trial can be treated as a joint trial, so a co-accused confession can be taken into consideration even against the absent person. This is a real change, and it has drawn comment, because it stretches the joint trial condition that the old rule built in. Read this with proclamation of an absconder under BNSS Section 84.
06Old law to new law: Evidence Act 30
The core rule is not new. It carries over from the old Evidence Act, with the new explanation added.
| Subject | Old Evidence Act, 1872 | New BSA, 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Confession of a co-accused in a joint trial | Section 30 | Section 24 |
So an advocate who knows the old Section 30 will recognise Section 24. The difference is the new rule treating an absconder’s trial as a joint trial. For the wider shift, see key changes from the Evidence Act to the BSA, and for related confession rules, see dying declaration under BSA Section 26.
07Practical points
- Check the joint trial condition. The confession can be used only if the makers and the co-accused are tried together for the same offence.
- Do not let it stand alone. Argue that a co-accused confession cannot by itself support a conviction, and demand corroboration.
- Watch for excluded confessions. A confession to the police cannot be revived against a co-accused through Section 24.
- Note the absconder rule. Where an accused has absconded under a Section 84 proclamation, the trial may be deemed joint, so plan for the confession to be considered.
- Keep the statement in context. The confession must affect both the maker and the co-accused to be considered against the co-accused.
08Where Claw fits
Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.
Because a co-accused confession is never proof on its own, the real work is finding the judgments that show how much assurance courts have drawn from one, and when the joint trial condition was taken as met. Claw turns that into a short task. A search across more than 30 crore judgments surfaces rulings on Section 24 and the old Section 30 in under 5 seconds, sorted by section, party, or advocate. A live trial can then be followed across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, so each order and listing on the point is in front of you. Start from the case search across Indian courts hub.
Create a free Claw account to search this case law and watch a joint trial by party or advocate name. Claw does not use customer case documents to train AI models, it gives no legal advice, and it does not stand in for your counsel.
09Sources and further reading
- India Code (official text of the BSA, 2023): indiacode.nic.in
- BSA Section 24 (commentary): vidhijudicial.com
- Claw: clawlaw.in
This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The law changes through amendments and judgments, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you act.
10Frequently asked questions
Can one accused’s confession be used against a co-accused?
Yes, but only in a narrow way. Under Section 24 of the BSA, where two or more people are tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession by one of them affecting both is proved, the court may take it into consideration against the co-accused. It is not substantive evidence and needs corroboration.
Which old section does BSA Section 24 replace?
It replaces Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The core rule carries over, with a new explanation that treats an absconder’s trial as a joint trial.
How much weight does a co-accused confession carry?
Limited weight. It is not substantive evidence against the co-accused, and a conviction should not rest on it alone. Courts treat it as a factor that can lend assurance to other evidence, not as a stand alone basis for conviction.
What is the new rule for absconders under Section 24?
An explanation to Section 24 deems a trial held in the absence of an accused who has absconded, or failed to comply with a proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS, to be a joint trial for this section. So a co-accused confession can be considered even against the absent person.
Can a confession to the police be used against a co-accused?
No. A confession that the law excludes, such as one made to a police officer, cannot be brought back in against a co-accused through Section 24. The exclusion applies to the co-accused too.
Can I research co-accused confession cases in Claw?
Yes. A search across more than 30 crore judgments shows, in under 5 seconds, how courts have weighed a co-accused confession under Section 24 and the old Section 30, and a live joint trial can be followed across 9,102 courts, benches and forums by party or advocate name. Claw researches and tracks the matter but does not give legal advice.