1970 (3) TMI 183 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code
- Validity of confession and its retraction
- Corroboration of confession with circumstantial evidence
- Sentencing

Analysis:

The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to death for the murder of three individuals, including his parents and brother. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had a motive to commit the murders due to family disputes over property inheritance. The appellant's confession, made before a Magistrate, formed a crucial part of the evidence against him. The confession was retracted during the trial, but the court found corroboration of the confession in the appellant's conduct, such as changing clothes after the murders and being present near the crime scene. The court emphasized that a retracted confession requires corroboration to establish its reliability, and in this case, the circumstantial evidence supported the confession. The court upheld the conviction based on the confession and corroborating evidence.

The defense argued that the confession was not voluntary, citing alleged police misconduct and lack of statutory requirements in recording the confession. The defense also contended that a retracted confession should not be relied upon without substantial corroboration. However, the court clarified that a confession can be accepted if found voluntary and true, fitting into the proved facts of the case. The court highlighted that a retracted confession requires scrutiny to determine if the retraction affects its voluntary nature. In this case, the court found the confession to be voluntary and true, dismissing the defense's arguments regarding its validity.

Regarding sentencing, the court noted the absence of mitigating circumstances due to the gravity of the crimes committed by the appellant. Given the nature of the offenses - three murders within the appellant's family - the court upheld the death penalty as the appropriate punishment. The court concluded that the appeal lacked merit, affirming the conviction and sentencing of the appellant for the murders.