TMI Blog1957 (9) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agnate in the fourth degree of the second accused. It is thus seen that all the accused were related to each other. The learned Sessions Judge framed four charges of which the first was against the appellant, that he on June 6, 1956, at night in the Village of Vengakalpalayam, committed the murder of Marappa Goundan by cutting him with an aruval; while the second charge was that at about the same time and place and in the course of the same transaction, he committed the murder of Muthu Goundan by stabbing him with a spear. The third count of the charge was against the first and the second accused that they conjointly committed the offence of attempt to murder by stabbing one Munia Goundan with a spear and knife, and the last count of the charge was against accused Nos. 3 4 that they abetted the commission of the offence of attempt to murder of Munia Goundan by being -present on the scene. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted accused Nos. 2, 3 4, but convicted and sentenced the appellant before us in the manner stated above. The village, where the offences were committed, was factionridden in which the appellant, his father and others took one side, whereas the two deceased ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies on him and also saw the shed of Sennimalai Goundan (P.W. 4) aflame. At this P.W. 4 and P.W. 5 proceeded to the burning shed and on the way saw Natarajan (P.W. 10), the son of the deceased Marappa Coundan, weeping and lamenting in his field. Reaching the place wherefrom P.W. 10 was wailing, P.W. 4 and P.W. 5 saw Marappa Goundan lying dead on a cot in s the shed with injuries. It is in evidence that the witnesses then saw the shed of P.W. 4 completely burnt down and after that Karuppa Goundan and Sennimalai Goundan went to the house of the village Munsif who was living about four miles away from the village and gave a report about the occurrence at about 5 a.m. on 7-61956 and which is on record as Exhibit P.I. Information reached the Sub-Inspector of Police of Avanashi (P.W.17) at 8-30 a.m. who reached the place of occurrence at 11 a.m. Investigation was then started, the details of which it is unnecessary to mention. At about 12 noon near a temple in the village finding the appellant there, the SubInspector of Police arrested him after which the appellant made a statement, the admissible portions of which are marked as Exhibit P. 13. From the appellant material objects Nos. 10 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t-. Before the learned Sessions Judge the appellant denied the offence and retracted the confession made by him on the ground that the Sub-Inspector and the Circle Inspector of Police threatened to implicate the appellant's father and five others in the crime if he did not confess and that was the reason why he made a false confession. The learned Sessions Judge accepted the testimony of Natarajan (P. W. 10), Nachimuthu Goundan (P.W. 11) and Subbanna Goundan (P.W. 12) with regard to the murders and also that of Munia Goundan (P.W. 5) and Komaraswami Goundan (P.W. 6) with regard to the attack on Munia Goundan. He also held that the confession, Exhibit P. 3/A, was voluntary and true and on the footing of the oral evidence, corroborated amply by the confession, the appellant was convicted and sentenced. In the High Court Somasundaram J. who delivered the judgment of the court, was not inclined to place reliance on the oral testimony of P.W. 5, P.W..10 and P.W. 1 1. The learned Judge was of the opinion that it was not safe to act on the evidence of Natarajan (P.W. 10) and convict the appellant of the offence of murder of Marappa Goundan. The High Court did not accept the evidenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was cleared of all police officials, and the Jail Warder alone was placed in-charge; thereafter the Sub-Magistrate gave the necessary warnings and enough time was given for reflection. The criticism levelled by the appellant's counsel is that despite these beneficient actions, still the influence of the police on the appellant still remained and that even at the time when the confession was given. it cannot be said that the appellant was free from police pressure. Our attention was invited to passages in cross-examination of P.W. 7 where he had stated that on both the occasions when the appellant was produced for recording of the confession, the Police Constable in guard at the Sub-Jail was in charge and further that there is a gate way between the Police Station and the court, and that gate way is the approach to the Subjail. From these circumstances inference is sought to be drawn that though during the relevant periods the incarceration of the appellant was in a Sub-Jail, still he was under police custody and influence and, therefore, there was no clearance of the supervening police control on him, in order to make his mind free from all such influence. We have carefu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel is that in order to save his father and some others, the appellant implicated himself and confessed falsely to an act which he did not commit. Criticism has been levelled against the mode and manner in which the question was put as directly inducing the appellant to immolate himself and thereby save his kith and kin. We are asked to say that the appellant, being an emotional young man of noble sentiments and spirit, did not desire to have his father implicated in a crime of this sort and what may be ascribed as a filial obligation was performed in trying to get release of his father from the enmeshes of the police. Such an argument, we are afraid, cannot carry any conviction. The form of the question is prescribed by the Criminal Rules of Practice and if the officer before whom the confession is made, fails to put it, then his failure will be criticised as blameworthy. We do not feel that any nefarious object existed in putting a perfectly innocuous and obligatory question to the appellant asking him Why he wants to make a statement? Further, P.W. 17, the Investigating Sub-Inspector, has clearly denied the alleged inducement by the police that if be did not confess, other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lities of the case, and Mr. Umrigar relying on these observations urges that on a comparison of the confession with the other parts of the prosecution evidence, the irresistible conclusion should follow that on the face of it the confessional statement is untrue. The material portions of the confessional document concerning the actual crime are to the following effect: So, on Wednesday night at about 11 O'clock, I took aruval, spear and knife sharp on both sides and went to Chetty Thottam, near our garden. Marappa Goundan, then was lying on the cot in his shed and sleeping. I cut him with aruval on the neck. While coming from there, to the house of Muniappa Gouildan (1) Criminal Appeals NOS. 22 and 23 Of 1957, decided April 10, 1957. in our village, Muthu Goundail came opposite to me in our village street. Thinking that he came to catch me, I stabbed him. The aruval fell there itself. Then, I went to Muniappa Gouudan's house, and stabbed Muniappa Goundan. Afterwards, I set fire to the shed of Sennimalai Goundan at a distance of four furlongs to our village. Then I came to our garden and lay. From this, according to the defence counsel, it is seen that only one c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion may form the basis of conviction if believed to be true and voluntarily made. For the purpose of arriving at this conclusion the court has to take into consideration not only the reasons given for making the confession or retracting it but the attending facts and circumstances surrounding the same. It may be remarked that there can be no absolute rule that a retracted confession cannot be acted upon unless the same is corroborated materially. It was laid down in certain cases one such being Kesava Pillai alias Koralan and another and Kesava Pillai alias Thillai Kannu Pillai (I.L.R. 53 Mad. 16o.) that if the reasons given by an accused person for retracting a confession are on the face of them false, the confession may be acted upon as it stands and without any corroboration. But the view taken by this court on more occasions than one is that as a matter of prudence and caution which has sanctified itself into a rule of law, a retracted confession cannot be made solely the basis of conviction unless the same is corroborated one of the latest cases being 'Balbir Singh Versus State of Punjab (A.I.R. 1957 S.C. 216.), but it does not necessarily mean that each and every circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elled that the Chemical Examiner's report does not show the extent of blood on M.O. No. 12, the bed-sheet, in which the appellant wrapped himself after the offence. All that the document states is that among other items it is also stained with humanblood, but Mr. Umrigar argues that this description only shows that there would have been only a speck or a spot of blood on the bed sheet, for according to him, as a matter of fact, there should have been a large quantity of blood on the hands of the appellant if he had, without washing, used a bed-sheet, thereafter large patches of blood are likely to be present on the bed-sheet. If that is so, the mere fact that the presence of blood is described as stains would show that the prosecution case cannot be true. We do not feel inclined to put such a restricted meaning on the word I stain'. 'Stained with human blood' is an expression commonly found in Chemical Examiner's reports and it does not necessarily refer to specks of blood alone. We do not think that any inference can be drawn from the use of the word 'stain' in the Chemical Examiner's report, that there was not sufficient blood on the bed-sheet. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
