1958 (9) TMI 82 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the appellant was rightly convicted and sentenced for the murder of Nirmala Devi.
2. Admissibility and relevance of Prem's retracted confession against the appellant.
3. Corroboration of Prem's confession in material particulars.
4. Recovery of the deceased's ornaments and its connection to the appellant.
5. The conduct of the appellant post-murder.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether the appellant was rightly convicted and sentenced for the murder of Nirmala Devi:
The court examined whether the evidence established that the appellant, with the assistance of Prem, murdered Nirmala Devi. The prosecution's case was based on the confession of Prem, the appellant's statement leading to the recovery of Nirmala Devi's ornaments from Raj Rani, and the recovery of a blood-stained dagger from the appellant's belongings.

2. Admissibility and relevance of Prem's retracted confession against the appellant:
The court considered whether Prem's retracted confession was admissible and relevant against the appellant. According to Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, a confession made by one accused affecting himself and his co-accused can be taken into consideration by the court against both. The court noted that although a retracted confession is admissible, it requires the fullest and strongest corroboration on material particulars to convict a co-accused.

3. Corroboration of Prem's confession in material particulars:
The court examined whether Prem's confession was voluntary and true and whether it received full and strong corroboration in material particulars. Prem's confession included details about his association with the appellant, the appellant's intention to commit rape and robbery, and the events leading to the murder. The court found Prem's confession to be voluntary and corroborated by various pieces of evidence, including the presence of a blood-stained pajama in Banwari Lal's house and the presence of Prem at the police station with Nirmala Devi's child.

4. Recovery of the deceased's ornaments and its connection to the appellant:
The court found significant corroboration in the recovery of Nirmala Devi's ornaments from Raj Rani, the appellant's mistress. The appellant's statement led to the recovery of these ornaments, which Banwari Lal identified as belonging to his wife. The evidence of Charan Dass and Gori Shanker, who witnessed the recovery, was believed by the court. This recovery strongly indicated that the appellant was in possession of the stolen ornaments soon after the murder, corroborating Prem's confession.

5. The conduct of the appellant post-murder:
The court noted the appellant's disturbed state of mind post-murder, which was consistent with his having committed the crime. The appellant was seen calling out the name "Nirmala," which he explained as being related to a love affair with a girl named Nirmala, daughter of Assistant Sub-Inspector Rikhi Ram. The court did not accept this explanation and found the appellant's conduct to be incriminating.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that Prem's confession was voluntary, true, and corroborated in material particulars. The recovery of Nirmala Devi's ornaments at the instance of the appellant provided the strongest corroboration of Prem's confession. The appellant's possession of the ornaments soon after the murder indicated his involvement in the crime. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming the appellant's conviction and sentence for the murder of Nirmala Devi.