TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder section 120B was awarded, while the co-accused Laxmi Prasad was further sentenced to the period already undergone for offence punishable under Section 412 IPC. 3. The High Court did not find any substance in the appeals and dismissed the same as noted above. 4. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 8.1.1992, Gayatri Devi, wife of the informant, had gone to Pandra Agricultural Market by her Ambassador car bearing registration No. AAY 7375 and from there she left for her residence at about 8 PM after collecting the sale proceeds of the day of shop Nos.244 to 251. The driver of the car, Laxmi Paswan, who was one of the accused, was driving the car. Gayatri Devi after collecting a sum of ₹ 1,84,405/- did not return to her house, the informant informed Sukhdeo Nagar P.S. regarding the missing of his wife and the driver of the car, Laxmi Paswan. Laxmi Paswan was employed by the informant as the driver of his car on the recommendation of the previous driver, namely, Rajendra Choudhary. When the wife of the informant as well as the driver did not return till night, the informant, on the next morning i.e. on 9.1.1992, submitted a written report alleging therein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .10.1992. One of the accused, namely, Laxmi Paswan was sentenced to death, while other accused persons were sentenced to undergo RI for life. Thereafter, both the State and the accused persons preferred appeal against the impugned judgment and the High Court, by its judgment dated 28th July, 1993, set aside the judgment of conviction passed by the VIth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi and the case was remanded to the Court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi for fresh commitment proceeding and learned C.J.M. was directed to examine Lalit Sanga, the approver, (PW6), as prosecution witness in accordance with law and procedure. After remand of the case, the learned C.J.M. examined approver Lalit Sanga under Section 306 Cr.P.C. and thereafter committed the case to the Court of Sessions by order dated 19.2.1997 and after remand of the case, the case was registered as Sessions Trial No.156/97. The Learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi transferred the case to another Court for holding the trial of the accused persons. On receipt of the record, charges were framed against the accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 396, 412 and 120 (B) IPC. 5. Trial proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t been complied with. It is also submitted that the alleged confession of this witness does not satisfy the requirements of Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short the 'Evidence Act'). Accused Lalit Sanga had not confessed to his active participation in the occurrence. His evidence is also not fully truthful. 8. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand supported the impugned judgment. 9. The High Court noted that the order of CJM was not set aside. What was set aside partly was that Lalit Sanga was examined but not cross examined and his statement was not recorded in the presence of the accused. That part of the order has been complied with and Lalit Sanga was examined in the presence of the accused and he was also cross examined and thereafter case was committed to the Court of Sessions. 10. We shall deal with this part of the appeal later. It is to be noted that learned counsel for the respondent-State submitted that the procedure mandated under Section 306 Cr.P.C. has been fully complied with. 11. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that not only has there been compliance with the requirements of Section 306 Cr.P.C. but also Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit unless he is corroborated in material particulars. The Statute permits the conviction of an accused on the basis of uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice but the rule of prudence embodied in illustration (b) to Section 114 of the Evidence Act strikes a note of warning cautioning the Court that an accomplice does not generally deserve to be believed unless corroborated in material particulars. In other words, the rule is that the necessity of corroboration is a matter of prudence except when it is safe to dispense with such corroboration must be clearly present in the mind of the Judge. [See Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar (AIR 1994 SC 2420)]. 16. Although Section 114 illustration (b) provides that the Court may presume that the evidence of an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless corroborated, may is not must and no decision of Court can make it must. The Court is not obliged to hold that he is unworthy of credit. It ultimately depends upon the Court's view as to the credibility of evidence tendered by an accomplice. 17. In Rex v. Baskerville (1916 (2) KB 658), it was observed that the corroboration need not be direct evidence that the accused commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation (b) to S. 114 of the Evidence Act which is as follows: The Court may presume that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated in material particulars. 22. The word 'corroboration' means not mere evidence tending to confirm other evidence. In DPP v. Hester( 1972) 3 All ER 1056, Lord Morris said : The purpose of corroboration is not to give validity or credence to evidence which is deficient or suspect or incredible but only to confirm and support that which as evidence is sufficient and satisfactory and credible; and corroborative evidence will only fill its role if it itself is completely credible ...... 23. In D.P.P. v. Kilbourne (1973) 1 All ER 440, it was observed thus: There is nothing technical in the idea of corroboration. When in the ordinary affairs of life one is doubtful whether or not to believe a particular statement one naturally looks to see whether it fits in with other statements or circumstances relating to the particular matter; the better it fits in the more one is inclined to believe it. The doubted statement is corroborated to a greater or lesser extent by the other statements or circumstances with which it fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd extent must necessarily vary with circumstances of each case and also according to the particular the offence charged. But to this extent the rules are clear. 26. First, it is not necessary that there should be independent confirmation of every material circumstance in the sense that the independent evidence in the case, apart from the testimony of the complainant or the accomplice, should in itself be sufficient to sustain conviction. As Lord Readings says - 'Indeed, if it were required that the accomplice should be confirmed in every detail of the crime, his evidence would not be essential to the case, it would be merely confirmatory of other and independent testimony.' 27. All that is required is that there must be some additional evidence rendering it probable that the story of the accomplice (or complainant) is true and that it is reasonably safe to act upon it. 28. Secondly, the independent evidence must not only make it safe to believe that the crime was committed but must in some way reasonably connect or tend to connect the accused with it by confirming in some material particular the testimony of the accomplice or complainant that the accused commit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PW-6 stands corroborated when doctor found injury on the body of Gayatri Devi and further that abrasions were also found on the cheek and neck when accused-appellant pressed the mouth of Gayatri Devi so that she may not raise alarm and further that money was looted and part of looted money was recovered from the possession of Laxmi Paswan on the basis of his confessional statement. Although this fact has occurred prior to arrest of PW-6, but with the evidence of PW-6 all these facts corroborate the evidence of PW-6 because he was not knowing all these facts and with his evidence all these facts stand corroborated and, therefore, there is complete corroboration of the evidence of PW-6 and there is no ground for disbelieving the evidence of PW-6 and therefore on the basis of the evidence of PW-6 accused-appellant and co- accused Lalu Ram were found guilty and they were involved in the abduction as well as in the occurrence under Section 396 IPC. 33. We shall now deal with the question relating to the pardon. 34. So far as pardon portion of the order of CJM is concerned, that has not been set aside and the proceeding relating to other portion has been set aside by which Lalit S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
