Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard an appeal against conviction in a murder case where the appellant was prosecuted along with four others for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant had been convicted for both offences and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, with the High Court confirming his conviction while acquitting the other four accused. The prosecution case relied entirely on an extrajudicial confession allegedly made by the appellant to several witnesses, with the first information report being registered on 20th June 1989 based on a complaint by Lakhi Prasad Chourasia (PW5) regarding the murder of his son Kamlesh and nephew Bulla. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses, with six of them including the complainant being declared hostile, leaving only three witnesses (PW7, PW8, and PW9) who supported the prosecution case regarding the extrajudicial confession. The core legal issue was whether the conviction based solely on this extrajudicial confession could be sustained. The appellant's counsel challenged the reliability of the confession evidence, while the prosecution maintained it was sufficient for conviction. The Court analyzed the law on extrajudicial confession, noting it is generally weak evidence but can sustain conviction if proved voluntary and truthful, with evidentiary value depending on the person to whom it is made. The Court then meticulously examined the testimonies of the three supporting witnesses, finding significant inconsistencies in their accounts regarding where and when the confession was made, unnatural conduct in not reporting to police despite knowledge of murder, and lack of any established relationship between the appellant and witnesses that would explain why he would confide in them. The Court also noted the prosecution's failure to examine material witness Bhagirath and investigate the source of information received by PW5. The Court concluded the extrajudicial confession lacked reliability and there was no corroborating evidence, making the conviction unsustainable. Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned judgments and acquitted the appellant of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Evidence - Extrajudicial Confession - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302, 34, 201 - The Supreme Court examined the evidentiary value of extrajudicial confession in a murder case where the appellant was convicted based solely on such confession - The Court held that while a conviction can be sustained on extrajudicial confession if proved voluntary and truthful, in this case the confession lacked reliability due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies, unnatural conduct of witnesses, and absence of corroboration - The Court discarded the confession evidence and acquitted the appellant (Paras 5-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction based solely on extrajudicial confession can be sustained when the confession lacks reliability and corroboration
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgments, acquitted the appellant of offences under Sections 302/34 and 201 IPC, and cancelled his bail bonds. The appeal was allowed.
Law Points
- Extrajudicial confession is generally a weak piece of evidence
- conviction can be sustained only if confession is proved voluntary and truthful
- evidentiary value depends on person to whom confession is made
- corroboration not required as a rule but adds credibility
- court must assess reliability considering circumstances
