JUDGMENT :- The above four appeals have arisen from the decision in sessions trial case No. 2 of 19a3 by the Sessions Judge, Manipur, on 18-12-53 which resulted in conviction and sentence of the 4 appellants to 3 years R. I. and a fine of RS. 100/- or in default one years R. I. each, under Section 395, I.P.C.

2. It is alleged by the prosecution that on the night between 24/25-1-53, a dacoity was committed in the house of M. Tolchou Singh at Laimanai Basti by a gang of dacoits numbering 8 or 10. The above 4 appellants are alleged to belong to that gang. The occurrence took place at about 2 A.M. Tolchou Singh P.W. 2 was sleeping in his house along with his wife Kamini Devi and a son Nimai Singh aged 15 years. Ningthemjao Singh was also there as a guest for the night. According to Toichou Singh P.W. 2 the front door of his house was being forcibly broken open when the sound awakened him. Immediately he found some 4 persons rushing towards him. He was at that time going to conceal himself underneath his bedstead having smelled the bad game. One blow with a sword was flung at him which struck against the mosquito-curtain hanging on the bedstead. The dacoits dragged him on the ground, trampled over him, beat him and kicked him. Rs. 6000/- were demanded or threat to kill was there. To save his life Tolchou Singh surrendered keys of his boxes which were broken open and articles taken away. Similarly Kamini Devi, P.W. 3, wife of Tolchou Singh was dealt with, and keys of almirah taken, resulting in the removal of articles from there. At the point of death, the inmates were not allowed to open their mouths. The guest P.W. 4 T. Ningthemjao Singh was also tied down, and the boy remained covered on account of fear. According to Tolchou Singh he could recognise Mohon Singh and Pisak Singh accused out of the lot. Alter the departure of the dacoits, Ningthemjao Singh untied his binding with the help of his teeth, ran to P.W. 1 Amusana Singhs house nearby and informed him of the occurrence. Amusana Singh who is a son of Tolchou Singh informed the chaukidar and villagers. He went to the Police Station in the morning and lodged ejahar. The value of the stolen property removed is said to be Rs. 2218/-.

3. All the 7 accused sent by the police after investigation were committed to the Sessions Court for trial under S. 395, I.P.C., out of which the above 4 were convicted and the remaining three were acquitted. The above 4 appellants pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. They produced no defence.

4. The factum of dacoity is not questioned. It is vigorously contested on behalf of the appellants that they were not among the dacoits and that their guilt is not proved beyond any reasonable doubt. The two appellants Jugeswar Singh and Yaima Singh have retracted their confessional statements recorded by the Magistrate to whom they were sent for the purpose, saying that the same were the result of police pressure and beating.

5. The only point for determination, therefore, is whether the four appellants or any of them were members of the gang who committed dacoity in the house of Tolchou Singh at Laimanai Basti on the alleged night and that their complicity in the crime is proved beyond any reasonable doubt.

6. The only evidence against Jugeswar Singh appellant is his own and confessional statement made before the Magistrate on 15-5-53 which was later on retracted by mm in the committing Magistrates Court, as well as in the trial court saying that it was the result of police torturing, threat and beating. As some material corroboration is necessary for basing conviction on a retracted confession, the learned Sessions Judge has taken help of the retracted confessional statement made by another co-accused Soibam Yaima Singh before the same Magistrate on 14-5-53. The same kind of evidence is against S. Yaima Singh appellant also and nothing more, viz., his own retracted confessional statement which is sought to be corroborated by retracted confes

Click Here to Read the rest of this document