THE CONVENTIONAL RESTRICTIVE AND THE MODERN LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 30 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT

Section 30 of the Evidence Act allows the confession of an accused to be admitted against the co-accused. However, since it is a radical and dangerous departure from the rule that hearsay should not be admitted, the Indian and Malaysian Courts have not recognized such confession as falling within the definition of ‘evidence’. It can only be used as a last resort and hence has been strictly construed throughout. But Singaporean Courts have now given it a liberal construction and elevated it to the status of a rule of evidence. The researcher’s view is that this is dangerous and our courts should be wary of following Singaporean Courts’ judicial thinking.