TMI Blog1955 (9) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... similar statement. Thereupon, Sri Kureel handed them over to the police for further investigation. At about 3 a. m. on the same night, Bhola and Ram Singh took the police, Sri Kureel some others to an outlying garden, and at their instance, the dead body of Sumer Singh was discovered in a well in that garden. The post-mortem examination showed that death was due to asphyxia. Both the courts below have held that it was not a case of accidental drowning but of murder by strangulation; and that finding has not been disputed. The only question is, who perpetrated the crime? 2. Accused 1 and 2 were in the lock-up until 22nd May, when they were taken into jail custody. On the 24th, both of them made confessional statements (Exhibits P-5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resumed that the appellant was arrested on the night of the 20th as the result of statements made by accused 1 and 2. The police, however, released the appellant immediately, and it was not till 8-6-1952 that he was re-arrested. If is certainly remarkable that the police should have released the appellant immediately after his arrest on the 20th without further investigation, and it is even more remarkable that no steps should have been taken to apprehend him at least after the confessions implicating him were made by accused 1 and 2 on the 24th. The explanation for this conduct as found by both the courts below was that the local police were reluctant to bring the real offenders to book. To appreciate this, it must be mentioned that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant in custody till 20th August at the Krishna Talkies. On the 20th, the appellant was sent back to jail custody, and on the 21st he made die confessional statement, Exhibit P-15, to P. W. 28. In this statement, he implicated the fourth accused as the prime offender. Meantime, the fourth accused had been arrested on 4-8-1952, and eventually, the four accused were committed to the Sessions Court for trial on the charge that they had murdered Sumer Singh. The Sessions Judge held that the confessions of accused 1 and 2 had been sufficiently corroborated, and convicted them under Section 302, but in view of their age--they were aged 14 and 16--sentenced them to transportation for life. As regards the appellant who was the third acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate Exhibit P-15, and that the confessions of accused 1 and 2 are inadmissible as against the appellant, and should not have been acted upon. The question how far the confessions of co-accused, could be treated as evidence against an accused was considered elaborately in -- 'Kashmira Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh', and it was held therein that such statements, were not evidence as defined in Section 3 of the Evidence Act, that no conviction could be founded thereon, but that if there was other evidence on which a conviction could be based, they could be referred to as lending assurance to that conclusion and for fortifying it. Exhibits P-5 and P-6 are, therefore, not substantive evidence, and could only be taken into consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfession. It was argued that better evidence was not forthcoming, as the investigation by P.W. 32 was, as already stated, half-hearted and perfunctory, and no adequate steps were taken to secure evidence before P.W. 33 took up the matter on 18-7-1952. All this is true, and the result is no doubt very unfortunate; but that does not cure the defect from which Exhibit P-15 suffers. It was also argued that both the courts below had found that Exhibit P-15 was voluntary, and that that was a finding with which this Court would not interfere in special appeal. But then, the courts below have, in coming to that conclusion, failed to note that P.W. 33 has offered no explanation for keeping the appellant in separate custody from the 7th to 20th A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Court would not ordinarily interfere with the views of the courts below. But in the view that Exhibit P-15 is not shown to be voluntary, there is no need to further discuss the question Whether if it was voluntary, the evidence of P.Ws. 13 and 15 affords , sufficient corroboration thereof. 9. Then, there remain the confessions of accused 1 and 2, Exhibits P-5 and P-6. There being, in our view, no substantive and independent evidence on which a conviction could be based, the confessions cannot be used for sustaining the conviction, and should be left out of consideration altogether. We may also add that we are not satisfied that those statements can He regarded as lending assurance to the confession recorded in Exhibit P-15. On th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
