The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility and credibility of extrajudicial confessions, the need for corroborating evidence, and the importance of establishing the confession as true, voluntary, and made in a fit state of mind.

B.R. Gavai, J.

1. The appellant challenges the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gondia in Sessions Trial No. 41/2012, dated 6.4.2013, vide which the learned Trial Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas the accused is sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is thus :

The deceased Motabai was a mother of the appellant and they were residing together at Brahmni, Tahsil Amgaon, District Gondia. Deceased Motabai was receiving pension after the death of her husband. The appellant was not doing anything and was addicted to liquor. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant used to demand money from deceased Motabai for consuming liquor and on that count there used to be quarreled between them. On the morning of 13.6.2011, PW1 Devraj Dhawde, who is cousin of the appellant, learnt that deceased Motabai was lying dead in her house. Consequently he visited the house of deceased Motabai. On visiting the house, he saw deceased Motabai was lying on the ground and there were injuries on her person. Two sickles and one axe was found lying which were stained with blood. The appellant was sitting in his house and there was injury on his person also. The accused informed Devraj Dhawde (PW1) that he had attacked deceased Motabai by means of sickles and axe and caused her death as she did not pay money for consuming liquor. The accused also informed that after commission of this heinous act, he had repentance and consequently he attempted to commit suicide. PW1 Devraj called the President of the “Tanta Mukti Samiti” and also the Police Patil. Both of them i.e. PW2 Kewalram Pande, Police Patil and PW3 Kashiram Nagrikar, the President of the “Tanta Mukti Samiti” came on the scene of occurrence. The appellant informed them about the commission of crime. Telephonic information was given to the police, who arrived at the spot and removed the accused to the Rural Hospital, Amgaon. First Information Report came to be lodged, vide Crime No.59/2011, below Exh.41. Oral report was lodged by PW1 Devraj Dhawade below Exh.40. On the basis of the same, the printed FIR was registered vide Crime No.59/2011, below Exh.41. Investigation was set into motion. At the conclusion of investigation, chargesheet came to be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amgaon. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case came to be committed to the Sessions Court, Gondia. The charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code came to be framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Trial Judge passed the order of conviction and sentence as aforestated. Being aggrieved thereby the present appeal.

3. Shri R.M. Daga, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, submits that the conviction is based solely on the circumstances of extrajudicial confession. Learned counsel further submits that extrajudicial confession is a very weak piece of evidence. Learned counsel submits that unless there is some corroboration by proving incriminating circumstances, a conviction on the basis of an extrajudicial confession would not be sustainable. Learned counsel submits that for accepting the extrajudicial confession to be valid, it is necessary that it should be truthful, voluntary and the one which would inspire confidence in the mind of the Court. Learned counsel submits that the perusal of the evidence of PW2 and PW3 itself would reveal tha