2006 (12) TMI 480 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether on the evidence of this particular case it would not be safe to maintain the conviction of the appellant and he must be given the benefit of reasonable doubt?

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against judgment of Kerala High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 217 of 2002.

Analysis:
The case involves the appellant accused in a criminal case under the NDPS Act for allegedly handing over narcotics to another accused. The prosecution's case revolves around the events leading to the recovery of the narcotics and subsequent procedures. The prosecution presented witnesses and evidence, including confessional statements. However, the primary evidence against the appellant was a retracted statement of the co-accused and the appellant's own retracted confession.

The Supreme Court referred to legal precedents emphasizing the need for corroboration of accomplice evidence due to its inherent taint. The Court highlighted that while accomplice evidence is admissible, prudence dictates corroboration by independent evidence. The Court also discussed the admissibility and scrutiny of confessions made before officers under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need for careful examination of such confessions.

In this case, the Court concluded that based on the evidence presented, it would not be safe to uphold the conviction of the appellant. The Court stressed that the decision was specific to the facts of this case and should not be considered a general principle or precedent for other cases. Considering the appellant had already served more than six years in jail, the Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower courts' orders and ordering the appellant's immediate release unless required in connection with another case.