Important point
Extra-judicial confession is admissible if it inspired confidence and made voluntarily.

Judgment

Sema, J.—The respondent was convicted by the trial court under Section 302 IPC. The trial court relying upon the extra-judicial confession made before PW.1, PW.2 and PW.3 found the respondent guilty. The trial court also relied upon the evidence of P.W.9, the Investigating Officer corroborated by the evidence of PW.5, Doctor. On appeal being preferred by the accused, the High Court acquitted the accused respondent herein.

2. This appeal is preferred by the State by special leave.

3. The High Court recorded the acquittal on the ground that PW.1 and PW.2 before whom the accused made extra-judicial confession are strangers and there is no reason for the respondent to make the extra-judicial confession before PW.1, PW.2 and PW.3. The High Court also found that the statements of PWs.1 and 2 were full of contradiction and artificial. On this ground the accused was acquitted, however, the High Court has not assigned any reason with regard to the alleged contradiction between the statements of PW.1 and PW.2 and the acquittal is not supported at all. It is now well established principle of law that the judicial decision is based on reasons. We have been taken through the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 3 before whom the accused made extra-judicial confession. It is now established principle of law that extra-judicial confession is admissible if it inspired confidence and made voluntarily. The High Court reasoning that the accused has made a confession statement before a stranger is totally perverse. The evidence on record shows that PW.1 is the Sarpanch of the village, PW.2 and PW.3 are also ward members of the village gram panchayat.

4. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused had come to the house of PW.1 where PW.2 and 3 were sitting together and chatting and he had made extra-judicial confession before them voluntarily. It is also the evidence on record that PWs.1 and 2 went to the Police Station and lodged an FIR while PW.3 was with the accused in the house of PW.1. It is also in the evidence on record that PW.9 arrested the accused from the house of PW.1.

5. PWs.1, 2 and 3 were subjected to lengthy cross-examination. Not even a suggestion was put to the witnesses that the confession was tainted and non-voluntary or that it was obtained by coercion, inducement or promise of favour. In the case of Gura Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (2001) 2 SCC 205, this Court held in paragraph 6 at SCC p. 212 as under:

“It is settled position of law that extrajudicial confession, if true and voluntary, it can be relied upon by the court to convict the accused for the commission of the crime alleged. Despite inherent weakness of extrajudicial confession as an item of evidence, it cannot be ignored when shown that such confession was made before a person who has no reason to state falsely and to whom it is made in the circumstances which tend to support the statement. Relying upon an earlier judgment in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh [AIR 1954 SC 322] this Court again in Maghar Singh v. State of Punjab [(1975) 4 SCC 234] held that the evidence in the form of extrajudicial confession made by the accused to witnesses cannot be always termed to be a tainted evidence. Corroboration of such evidence is required only by way of abundant caution. If the court believes the witness before whom the confession is made and is satisfied that the confession was true and voluntarily made, then the conviction can be founded on such evidence alone. In Narayan Singh v. State of M.P. [(1985) 4 SCC 26] this Court cautioned that it is not open to the court trying the criminal case to start with a presumption that extrajudicial confession is always a weak type of evidence. It would depend on the nature of the circumstances, the time when the confession is made and the credibility of the witnesses who speak for such a confession. The retraction of extrajudicial confession which is a usual phenomenon in criminal cases would be itself not weaken the