TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 in the criminal case under the NDPS Act with which we are concerned. The prosecution case briefly stated is that on 1.10.2000 at 3.45 P.M., PW7, Radhesh, Intelligence Officer, received information that one person was standing in the parking area between Gandhi Park and Pattomthanu Pillai Park at East Fort, Thiruvananthapuram waiting for somebody to dispose of about one kilogram of heroin which was in his possession. PW7 recorded the information and submitted Ext. P10 report to PW5, the Superintendent, Narcotic Control Bureau Regional Intelligence Unit, Thiruvananthapuram. PW7 alongwith the informant proceeded to the place where the 1st accused was waiting and the 1st accused was shown to PW7 by the informant. PW5 alongwith PW4 and PW6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmons the 1st accused appeared before the N.C.B. Office and gave Ext. P12 statement in Tamil which was recorded by PW6. Thereafter PW6 arrested the 1st accused. On the next day the 1st accused was produced before the Magistrate who remanded him to the Sub Jail. Since the name of the 2nd accused was also mentioned in Ext. P12 statement, PW5 proceeded to Idinthikara of Thirunalveli District on the morning of 2.10.2000 and Ext. P15 summons was served on the 2nd accused directing him to appear before the N.C.B. Office at Thiruvananthapuram at 5 P.M. on that day. The 2nd accused appeared before the N.C.B. Office in the evening and gave Ext. P16 statement in his own handwriting. PW6 arrested the 2nd accused. The 2nd accused was also produced befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he very fact that he has participated in the commission of the offence introduces a serious taint in his evidence and Courts are naturally reluctant to act on such tainted evidence unless it is corroborated in material particulars by other independent evidence . Thus, it appears from the above decision that there is some taint in the evidence of an accomplice, and the reason for this obviously is that an accomplice's evidence is looked upon with suspicion because to protect himself he may be inclined to implicate the co-accused. We make it clear that we are not of the opinion that the evidence of the accomplice can never be relied upon, since such evidence is admissible under Section 133 of the Evidence Act. However, Section 133 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been held that a court shall not base a conviction on such a confession without corroboration. It is not a rule of law, but is only a rule of prudence that under no circumstances can such a conviction be made without corroboration, for a court may, in a particular case, be convinced of the absolute truth of a confession and prepared to act upon it without corroboration; but it may be laid down as a general rule of practice that it is unsafe to rely upon a confession, much less on a retracted confession, unless the court is satisfied that the retracted confession is true and voluntarily made and has been corroborated in material particulars . It is true that in the present case the confession was made by the accused not before an or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
