TMI Blog1930 (7) TMI 19X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed against him under Section 30 of the Evidence Act, I find myself wholly unable to follow it. 2. Apart from the so-called confession, there is, I think, a strong circumstantial case against the 1st appellant. Against the 2nd, there is that and more, that is to say, his statements, Exhibits G and H. They show that he was present when the murder was committed. That they give a true account of what happened is incredible. The murder and disposal of the body could not have been the work of one man. Nor is it believable that the 1st appellant would have suddenly murdered Ramaswami in the presence of the 2nd appellant without the previous knowledge and consent of the latter. The scene of the murder was probably deliberately chosen. It was a place where the Periyar channel, which was then certain to be in flood, runs close to the road. Doubtless the intention was, as stated in Exhibit H, to throw the body into the channel. Apparently, in the darkness, the murderers mistook the water in the burrow-pit for the channel. I agree in the order proposed by my learned brother. H.D.C. Reilly, J. 3. In this case the appellants, accused 1 and 2, have been convicted by the Sessions Judge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uded in the offence for which the accused persons are being tried, nor of any offence connected with that offence, nor of any other offence which may be disclosed by the evidence, but only of the very offence for which they are being tried offence always including under the explanation to the section abetments and attempts. That appears to me to be the plain meaning of the words. To interpret the word confession ' in the section in any wider sense is to accuse the Legislature of using loose language in a matter of great importance. In my opinion we must read the word confession as if it were followed immediately by the words of that offence ; and that appears to me to be the plain meaning of the section as read by a reasonable man. And indeed, if that were not the meaning, why should the use of the word confession be confined to cases where the accused persons are being tried for the same offence? But, keeping our attention for the moment on the words themselves, if we speak of persons being tried for the same offence and in the same sentence speak of one of them making a confession, how can we mean by confession a confession of any other offence unless we are most ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d persons are being tried. 6. It appears to me surprising that any other interpretation of the section should now be put forward. The interpretation I have indicated as proper was adopted by Straight, J., in Empress of India v. Ganraj I.L.R. (1879) A. 444 and his view has been followed in a great many later cases. The learned Public Prosecutor quoted in his favour Shivabhai v. Emperor I.L.R. (1926) B. 683. So far as that case deals with this point, I must say with very great respect that I neither agree with it nor understand it. 7. In Exhibit G, as I have mentioned, accused 2 does not admit that he took any part in the murder of Ramaswami Moopan: he admits only that he helped to dispose of the corpse. That is not a confession of the offence of murder for which accused 1 and 2 were tried, and therefore in my opinion the learned Sessions Judge in dealing with accused 1 should have excluded Exhibit G entirely from consideration. If that is done, what is the evidence against accused 1? There is evidence, which I see no reason to doubt, that for a few weeks accused 1 and 2 had been trading in sheep in partnership with Ramaswami Moopan and that they had taken some sheep thought in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceeds was ₹ 57. That the accused gave this explanation to Ramaswami's relations when they became anxious because he did not return is proved not only by oral evidence. Exhibit K is a letter, dated 4th December, written by P.W. 20, for P.W. 21, who is the brother of Ramaswami's widow, to their cousin, P.W. 22, who lives in the Trichinopoly District, near the place where Ramaswami and the accused had bought the sheep which they sold at Madura; and that part of the Trichinopoly District is east of the north part of the Madura District, where the accused and Ramaswami lived. Exhibit K runs: Our brother-in-law, Palaniamma's (P.W. ll's) husband, went there (i.e., to your place), purchased sheep and went to Madura to sell them. Those who went with him have returned about 7 days ago. When questioned, they say that Ramaswami has gone to eastern parts and I suspected it. So I request you to search for him in those parts and send him back at once and, if he is not., found, to inform me about it. 8. The genuineness of this letter cannot be disputed. Its history in the post is shown by the post-marks on its cover, Exhibit K-l; and Exhibit L is P.W. 22's answer to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because he had been beaten and was afraid. Oddly enough in his appeal petition he says that he did make the statement because he was afraid but that he stated what was true. However accused 2's admissions in Exhibit G are corroborated in a remarkable way. There is evidence that at his own village on 9th December accused 2 told the same story to P.Ws. 12, 14, 15, 16 and 18. They all say that accused 2 then gave them practically the same account of the murder as is given in Exhibit G except that P.Ws. 12 and 18 say that accused 2 told them that he refused to help in throwing the body away and that accused 1 did it by himself. In corroboration of the evidence of P.W. 12 about accused 2's admission on 9th December we have Exhibit H, the statement made by P.W. 12 to his Village Magistrate, P.W. 19, the same day, when he produced accused 2 before him; and the Village Magistrate adds that, when questioned by him, accused 2 admitted that he had told the Pan-chayat what is recorded in Exhibit H. When accused 2 told his story of the murder to P.W. 12 and the other witnesses on 9th December, none of them knew what had become of Ramaswami, still less that he had been murdered near Va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
