The division judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that confession made by the accused persons before the Panchayat will come within the meaning of extra-judicial confession. Extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence, but in the present case, recovery made on its basis lends credence to its credibility. Extrajudicial confession can form the basis for conviction, if the person before whom it is made, appears to be unbiased and not inimical to the accused.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the co-villager of the informant was missing and when they started searching for him. It transpired that he was last seen with his cousins (appellants) and thereafter, he was not seen again. Furthermore, the Appellant was interrogated and under pressure, they confessed to the crime of killing him in the night. Thereafter, to cause the disappearance of the evidence, the dead body had been concealed 5 km deep in the forest. On the said disclosure, the dead body was recovered. Based on this statement, the case was registered under Sections 302, 201/34 of the IPC against both appellants. The trial court convicted the accused persons. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal is filed.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The Appellant contended that there exists no eye witness to the incident and the case rests on extra-judicial confession which is considered weak evidence. There is no corroboration to prove the guilt of the appellants.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble Court observed that the deceased body was recovered after a confession was made in front of a village panchayat rather than the police. Police confessions are not admissible as evidence. Only facts deposed to as discovered as a result of information acquired, from a person suspected of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, are admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
The court furthermore observed that confession made by the accused persons before the Panchayat will come within the meaning of extra-judicial confession and the veracity of it, is established by the recovery of the dead body from the jungle area.
The court relied upon the judgment titled State of Maharashtra Versus Damu.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the opinion that extra-judicial confession made by the appellants in the present case leading to the recovery of the dead body from remote forest area, can be acted upon and made the basis for conviction of the appellants. The court affirmed the Judgment of conviction and sentence.
The decision of the Court:
With the above direction, the court dismissed the criminal appeal.
Case Title: Budhu Nag Chatar V. The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case No.: Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 29 of 2011 With Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 32 of 2011
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. R.P. Gupta, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jharkhand_High_Court.jpg