http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: BALDEV RAJ

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/09/1990

BENCH: FATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J) BENCH: FATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J) KANIA, M.H.

CITATION:  1991 AIR   37            1990 SCR  Supl. (1) 492  1991 SCC  Supl.  (1)  14 JT 1990 (4)   524  1990 SCALE  (2)615

ACT:     Criminal  Trial--Extra-judicial  confession--Evidentiary value  of--Whether can be relied upon by Court  for  convic- tion.

HEADNOTE:     The appellant was convicted under s. 302 IPC for murder- ing  his wife. The prosecution case was that on the  fateful day  the deceased had taken meals to the appellant while  he was  working in the field near his tubewell.  Her  dead-body was  recovered two days later in a nearby drain. He made  an extra-judicial  confession the same day at the panchayat  in the  presence  of PWs 3, 4 and 5 to the effect that  he  had killed  his wife in the wheat field and threw the  dead-body in the drain at night after removing her ornaments. The  FIR was  lodged thereafter in the presence of the appellant  and the  fact of his statement was recorded therein. The  weapon of offence, the kassi, and the ornaments were recovered from the hut near the tubewell at his instance. PW 3 narrated the events  that  preceded  the occurrence. PWs 4  and  5  fully corroborated the evidence of PW 3 in that the appellant  had confessed  his  guilt in their presence.  The  evidence  was accepted by the trial court.     The High Court sustained the conviction on the view that various  circumstances conclusively proved the guilt of  the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.     In  the appeal it was contended for the  appellant  that the extrajudicial confession even if true, was not voluntary but induced on the promise that he would he pardoned and the same  having been retracted could not form the basis  for  a conviction in the absence of any material corroboration. Dismissing the appeal,     HELD: 1. The High Court was right in its conclusion  and there was no ground for interference.     2.1  An extra-judicial confession, if voluntary  can  be relied  upon by the court alongwith other evidence  in  con- victing the accused. The 493 value of the evidence as to the confession depends upon  the veracity  of  the witnesses to whom it is made.  Though  the court requires the witness to give the actual words used  by

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

the accused as nearly as possible but it is not an  invaria- ble  rule that the court should not accept the evidence,  if not the actual words but the substance were given. It is for the court having regard to the credibility of the witness to accept  the  evidence or not. When the  court  believes  the witness before whom the confession is made and it is  satis- fied  that the confession was voluntary, conviction  can  be rounded on such evidence.     2.2  In  the instant case, the fact that  the  appellant made the confession is proved by cogent evidence. He and his father  were  brought  before  the  panchayat  held  in  the presence of PWs 3, 4 and 5. He was questioned and was  asked to speak the truth. This prompting by the panchayat does not amount  to  inducement or threat. The testimony of PW  4,  a lambardar, and PW 5, the Sarpanch being responsible  persons could not be doubted in the absence of any material to  show that they had been motivated to falsely implicate the appel- lant.  The circumstances under which the statement was  made leaves no room for doubt that the confession was voluntary.     2.3  The  discovery  of the dead  body  from  the  drain through  the  wheat field, presence of blood in  the  field, recovery  of  gold ornaments from the roof of  the  hut  and blood  stained  kassi from the hut near  the  tubewell  were material  circumstances  providing connecting links  in  the chain  of circumstantial evidence. The appellant when  exam- ined  did not offer any explanation except to deny  his  in- volvement. PW 3 had testified to the fact that the  deceased had complained about the illtreatment by her husband. In the light of such evidence, it is preposterous to maintain  that she  may have been assaulted by some unidentified  assailant somewhere  in the fields and the appellant had been  falsely implicated in the offence.     3. The circumstances thus proved were conclusive of  the guilt  of the appellant and incapable of being explained  on any other reasonable hypothesis. Conviction has,  therefore, to be maintained.

JUDGMENT:     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 206 of 1979.     From  the  Judgment and Order dated 27.9.  1978  of  the Punjab  and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 17  13 of 1975. 494 A.S. Sohal and S.K. Jain for the Appellant. Mahabir Singh and A.G. Prasad for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     FATHIMA BEEVI, J. Raj Kumari (20), the daughter of Ishar Dass. was married to the appellant Baldev Raj a year  before her tragic death in February, 1975. It appears that all  was not  well with the couple. Raj Kumari left for  her  parents house  in village Raison 75 Kms. away from  her  matrimonial home  in village Urlana Khurd. She stayed with  her  parents for  some days complaining ill-teatment by the  husband.  On the  assurance of the father-in-law, she was sent back  with her husband hardly a couple of months before the incident on 14.2. 1975. On that fateful day, it is said that Raj  Kumari took  meals  to the appellant who was working in  the  wheat field  near his tubewell.’ Raj Kumari did not  return  home. Her  dead-body  was discovered in the drain on  16.2.  1975. Multiple  injuries  were seen on her person.  Complaint  was lodged  at the police station on February 16, 1975 at  about 5.30 P.M. against the appellant who was finally chargesheet-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

ed  for  the offence under section 302 and 201,  I.P.C.  The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under section 302,  I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment  for life.  The High Court dismissed the appeal against the  con- viction  and sentence. This appeal by special leave  is  di- rected against the judgment of the High Court.     The conviction of the appellant is based on  circumstan- tial  evidence only. The main item of the evidence  consists of the extrajudicial confession stated to have been made  by the  appellant in the presence of Ishar Dass  (PW-3).  Ramji Dass (PW-4) and Satnam Dass (PW-5) at the panchayat on 16.2. 1975. besides the recovery of incriminating articles at  the instance  of  the appellant and the motive as spoken  to  by Ishar  Dass. According to the prosecution, on 15.2.1975  the appellant’s  father Hakam Chand contracted Ishar  Dass  when Raj  Kumari  was found missing from 14.2. 1975.  Ishar  Dass arrived at village Urlana Khurd accompanied by Satnam  Dass, Sarpanch  of his village, and others. At the panchayat  held in  the  presence of Ramji Dass, Nand Lal, Satnam  Dass  and others, the appellant stated that he killed his wife in  the wheat  field and threw the dead-body in the drain  at  night after  removing her ornaments. PWs 3, 4 and 5 testified  the fact  but  Nand Lal (DW-I) did not support  the  prosecution version. It is also the prosecution case that the  appellant was  handed over to and arrested by the police at  the  time the complaint was lodged after the 495 discovery  of the dead-body and that the appellant had  pro- duced the kassi and the gold ornaments concealed in the  hut near  the  tubewell.  PW-10. the  Sub-Inspector  of  Police, deposed  to having interrogated the appellant  and  effected the  recovery  on the basis of the statements  made  by  the appellant.  Ishar Dass (PW-3) narrated the events that  pre- ceded  the  occurrence  and also proved the  letter  he  had received  from  the appellant’s father when Raj  Kumari  was staying  with  him. He also stated the  circumstances  under which he happened to be at the panchayat on 16.2. 1975 along with  the others after being informed by Hakam Chand. PWs  4 and  5 fully corroborated the evidence of PW-3 in  that  the appellant  had  confessed his guilt in their  presence.  The evidence was accepted by the trial court and the High  Court to sustain the conviction against the appellant.     The argument on behalf of the appellant that the medical evidence  is conflicting with the prosecution case  was  re- jected  by the High Court finding that the  ante-mortem  in- juries  found on the body of Kumari could have  been  caused with the weapon recovered even on the statement made by  the Doctor  (PW-1). The recovery of the bloodstained earth  from the  wheat field near the tubewell,  recovery  blood-stained kassi  and the ornaments worn by Raj Kumari by PW-10 in  the opinion  of the High Court lent assurance to  the  statement mad,: by the appellant before the panchayat. The High  Court was of the view that the various circumstances  conclusively proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.     The main contention advanced on behalf of the  appellant before  us is that the High Court failed to  appreciate  the inherent  infirmities in the prosecution evidence  and  that there  is no legal evidence to support the findings. It  was maintained that the testimony of PWs 3, 4 and 5 relating  to the extra-judicial confession is discrepant and  incredible, that  the  confession even if true, was  not  voluntary  but induced  and the same having been retraced cannot  form  the basis  for a conviction in the absence of any material  cor- roboration.     The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

High  Court  had  refused to give benefit of  doubt  to  the accused despite facts apparent on the face of the record any interference  is called for. The extra-judicial  confession, according to the learned counsel, being a very weak piece of evidence, could not have been accepted as true or  voluntary in  view of the admission made by the prosecution  witnesses and improvement in the story given by Ishar Dass. He pointed out that at the panchayat the appellant was induced to  make a statement on the 496 promise that he would be pardoned and therefore the  confes- sion is unacceptable.     Normally this Court does not interfere with the  concur- rent  findings of the facts of the courts below in  the  ab- sence  of very special circumstances or gross errors of  law committed by the High Court and violation of the well estab- lished  principles  of the  appreciation  of  circumstantial evidence,  which results in serious and substantial  miscar- riage of justice to the accused. We heard the learned  coun- sel at length. We find that the High Court was right in  its conclusion and there is no good ground for interference.     The  first information was lodged by Ishar Dass  at  the police station where the appellant was also present. In  the first information report itself Ishar Dass has narrated  the story  of the panchayat having been held in the presence  of PWs  4 and 5 and the appellant having made  the  confession. PW-5  accompanied  Ishar  Dass from village  Raison.  It  is difficult  to hold that these persons hailing  from  another village would have been in a position to influence the local people  against the appellant and foist a case against  him. PW-4,  Lambardar  (Ramji Dass) substantially  supported  the prosecution  case. The courts below have carefully  analysed the  evidence and accepted the same. As rightly pointed  out by  the High Court, we find no merit in the submission  that the medical evidence is not in consonance with the  prosecu- tion  case.  The facts that the autopsy was held  nearly  72 hours after the injuries were caused and the witnesses  were examined long after the weapon was recovered are relevant in appreciating  the evidence of the medical witness. The  evi- dence  of  this witness read as a whole is  only  consistent with the case that the injuries could have been caused  with the weapon. The fact that the appellant made the  confession is  proved  by cogent evidence. The circumstances  that  his father was present throughout and the appellant himself  did not protest when he was present at the police station  nega- tives the suggestion of inducement or threat. The  discovery of  the  dead-body from the drain through the  wheat  field, presence  of blood in the field, recovery of gold  ornaments from,  the roof of the hut and blood stained kassi from  its premises  near the tubewell are material circumstances  pro- viding  connecting  links  in the  chain  of  circumstantial evidence.  The  appellant when examined did  not  offer  any explanation  except  to  deny his  involvement.  Ishar  Dass testified  to the fact that Raj Kumari had complained  about the  ill-treatment  by  her husband. In the  light  of  such evidence,  it is preposterous to maintain that the  deceased may  have  been  assaulted by  some  unidentified  assailant somewhere in the fields and the appellant 497 had been falsely implicated in the offence.     The confessional statement is not a long narration.  The substance of the statement is that the appellant killed  his wife  and  threw  the dead-body in the drain.  PW-4  is  the Lambardar  of village Urlana Khurd and PW-5 the Sarpanch  of Gram Panchayat of village Raison. The fact that a  panchayat

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

was  held  at village Urlana Khurd is admitted even  by  the hostile witness Nand Lal (DW-I). Ishar Dass when informed by Hakam Chand at his village that Raj Kumari was found missing entertained suspicion. He met his villagers and proceeded to the  appellant’s village the next day, along with  the  Sar- panch  and  other persons. The panchayat was held  there  on 16.2. 1975. The appellant and his father were brought before the panchayat. The appellant was questioned and was asked to speak  the  truth and then the appellant with  folded  hands said  that he murdered his wife in the wheat field when  she came  there with meals and later threw the dead-body in  the drain.  The  prompting by the panchayat does not  amount  to inducement  or threat and the circumstances under which  the statement was made leave no room for doubt that the  confes- sion was voluntary.     An  extra-judicial  confession,  if  voluntary,  can  be relied  upon by the court along with other evidence in  con- victing  the  accused. The value of the evidence as  to  the confession  depends  upon the veracity of the  witnesses  to whom  it  is made. It is true that the  court  requires  the witness  to  give the actual words used by  the  accused  as nearly as possible but it is not an invariable rule that the court  should  not accept the evidence, if  not  the  actual words  but  the substance were given. It is  for  the  court having  regard to the credibility of the witness  to  accept the  evidence  or not. When the court believes  the  witness before whom the confession is made and it is satisfied  that the  confession was voluntary, conviction can be rounded  on such  evidence.  Keeping these principles in mind,  we  find that  the  confession has been properly accepted  and  acted upon by the courts below and there is no scope for any doubt regarding the complicity of the appellant in the crime.  The confession of the appellant was voluntary. The testimony  of PW-4 and PW-5 being responsible persons could not be doubted in  the absence of any material to show that they  had  been motivated  to  falsely  implicate the  appellant.  The  very presence  of the appellant and his father with the party  of Ishar  Dass  throughout the operation upto lodging  of  com- plaint  at the police station dispel any  suspicion  against the  prosecution case and clearly point to the  truthfulness of the same. We are, therefore, unable to find any infirmity in the confession which has been accepted and relied upon by the courts below. 498     The circumstances proved are conclusive of the guilt  of the appellant and incapable of being explained on any  other reasonable,  hypothesis.  Conviction  has  therefore  to  be maintained. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The  appel- lant  who is on bail shall surrender to custody  to  undergo the sentence of imprisonment. P.S.S.                               Appeal dismissed. 499