Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ishwar Masram, a member of the State Reserve Police Force, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his colleague, Gangadhar Thakare. The prosecution case was that the appellant and the deceased were both employees of SRPF Group No.13 at Nagpur and were deputed at Jambiya Gatta for Naxal bandobast and camp security. The prosecution alleged that the appellant's wife had illicit relations with the deceased and that the deceased used to tease the appellant as impotent. On 6.1.2006, around 11.00 p.m., inmates of the camp heard sound of firing. Initially, they thought it was a Naxal attack, but later the appellant disclosed to his colleagues that he had killed Gangadhar Thakare. On being confronted, the appellant told his superior that since the deceased was teasing him as a person of third gender and impotent, he had committed the murder. The appellant was produced before the Police Station Officer, and an offence under Section 302 IPC was registered. After trial, the Sessions Judge convicted the appellant and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The appellant appealed to the High Court. The High Court found that the conviction was based essentially on the extrajudicial confession made by the appellant to his superior officer and to Madhukar. The court noted that extrajudicial confession is a very weak piece of evidence and unless there is some corroboration, it cannot form the basis of conviction. In this case, there was no other evidence to corroborate the confession. The court also noted that the circumstances did not conclusively point to the guilt of the appellant. Therefore, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Extrajudicial Confession - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for murder based on an extrajudicial confession made to his superior officer and a colleague. The court held that extrajudicial confession is a weak piece of evidence and requires corroboration. In the absence of any corroborative evidence, the conviction cannot be sustained. The court acquitted the appellant giving him the benefit of doubt. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code based solely on extrajudicial confession is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Extrajudicial confession is weak evidence
- requires corroboration
- conviction cannot be based solely on uncorroborated extrajudicial confession
- benefit of doubt to accused
