IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1696 OF 2005

BINOD MAHATO …… APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF WEST BENGAL … RESPONDENT

ORDER

1. This  appeal  is  directed  against  the  judgment  and  order  of  conviction  and  

sentence  passed  by  the  trial  Court  and  affirmed  by  the  High  Court.  The  

appellant, being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and  

sentence passed against him directing him to suffer imprisonment for life, has  

preferred this appeal in which we have heard the learned counsel appearing for  

the parties.

2. Counsel for the appellant has very forcefully argued before us that the extra-

judicial confession on which reliance has been placed by the Courts below could  

not  have been made the sole  basis of  conviction of  the appellant particularly  

when the same was shown to have been made to a gathering and not individually  

to each of the witnesses and also because all the said witnesses had not been  

examined.  Counsel  has  submitted  that  there  was  some doubt  created  in  the  

prosecution case and, therefore, the same should have been disbelieved by the  

Courts  below  and  the  appellant  should  have  been  acquitted.  The  aforesaid  

submissions made by the counsel appearing for the appellant have been refuted

by the counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. At this point, we wish to bring out the law relating to extra-judicial confession by  

referring to a judgment of this Court in State of U.P. v. M.K. Anthony reported in  

(1985) 1 SCC 505 at para 15 extracted hereinbelow: -

“15………………………….It  thus  appears  that  extrajudicial  confession appears to have been treated as a weak piece of   evidence but there is no rule of law nor rule of prudence that  it cannot be acted upon unless corroborated. If the evidence   about  extrajudicial  confession  comes  from  the  mouth  of   witness/witnesses  who  appear  to  be  unbiased,  not  even  remotely  inimical to  the accused,  and in respect  of  whom  nothing is brought out which may tend to indicate that he   may have a motive for attributing an untruthful statement to  the accused, the words spoken to by the witness are clear,  unambiguous and unmistakably convey that the accused is  the perpetrator of  the crime and nothing is omitted by the  witness which may militate against it, then after subjecting  the  evidence  of  the  witness  to  a  rigorous  test  on  the  touchstone of credibility, if it passes the test, the extrajudicial  confession  can  be  accepted  and  can  be  the  basis  of  a  conviction. In such a situation to go in search of corroboration  itself tends to cast a shadow of doubt over the evidence. If   the  evidence  of  extrajudicial  confession  is  reliable,  trustworthy and beyond reproach the same  can be  relied   upon and a conviction can be founded thereon.”

4. In order to appreciate the rival contentions of the parties, we have perused the  

evidence adduced in the case by the prosecution witnesses. The First Information  

Report was filed by PW-1, the informant, who had also stated about the extra-

judicial  confession  made  by  the  appellant  herein.  The  said  extra-judicial  

confession was made in the presence of a number of villagers, some of whom  

have  been  examined  and  they  have  corroborated  each  other  on  all  material  

particulars.  

5. There is another very vital factor which corroborates the extra-judicial confession  

made by the appellant and that is the theory of the last seen together. It has been

established  in  evidence  by  the  prosecution  witnesses  that  in  that  particular  

house and on the particular date and material time only the deceased and the  

accused were present as the other occupants of the house had gone to witness  

some singing programme. Since both the accused and deceased were present in  

the said house all  alone and since the deceased was found dead immediately  

upon return of the other occupants of the house, it was the accused who was to  

give an explanation as to how the deceased had died. He has failed to explain the  

circumstances  in  his  statement  under  Section  313  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  

Procedure. He has failed to explain the manner in which the deceased had died.  

The  deceased  was  found  with  marks  of  strangulation.  The  extra-judicial  

confession made by the appellant to the prosecution witnesses corroborates the  

case of the prosecution.  So far as the motive behind the murder is concerned,  

the same is also established by the very fact that the deceased who was the  

mother in law of accused was always fighting with the daughter of the accused  

and, therefore, that was the reason for which the murder was committed.  

6. In this view of the matter, we find no merit in this appeal. The same is dismissed.

7. Fees of the Amicus is fixed at Rs. 5,000/-

……………………………………...J [DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA]

.…………………………………...J   [C.K. PRASAD]  

NEW DELHI MARCH 30, 2010.