A confession made under duress cannot be considered valid evidence for conviction, especially in the absence of corroborating eyewitness testimony.

ORDER :

I.A. No. 11963 of 2024

The aforesaid instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 430(1) of the BNSS, 2023 for suspension of sentence of the appellant in connection with the judgment of conviction dated 18.09.2024 and order of sentence dated 20.09.2024 passed in Sessions Trial No. 160 of 2022 arising out of Pakartanr P.S. Case No. 18 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 308 of 2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Simdega whereby and where under, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 and 201 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and a default sentence of R.I. for 6 months under Section 302 I.P.C and R.I. for 7 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and a default sentence of R.I. for 3 months under Section 201 I.P.C.

2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where there is no eye witness.

3. It has also been submitted that the appellant has been convicted only on the basis of testimony of P.W.1-informant, who has deposed that on the basis of confession made by the appellant the dead body was recovered from nearby bush. However, P.W.1 at para 2 of his deposition has stated that confession has been made by the appellant on being beaten by the villagers.

4. It has been contended that the Investigating Officer, who has been examined as P.W.14 has also deposed regarding the confession of the appellant so recorded, but the said confession is not available on record.

5. Therefore, although the principal of Section 27 of the Evidence Act has been applied but the parameter provided under the aforesaid provision has not been followed, and, as such, it cannot be said that the recovery of the dead body, based upon the disclosure of the appellant, is absolutely applicable.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid grounds has submitted that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence.

7. While on the other hand, learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

8. It has been contended by the learned A.P.P. that P.W.1 and the other witnesses have fully supported the prosecution version and, as such, it is not correct on the part of the appellant to plead that prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts.

9. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and gone across the findings rendered by the learned Trial Court in the impugned judgment. We have also gone through the testimonies of the witnesses and the exhibits available in the L.C.R.

10. It is evident from the F.I.R that on the basis of the confession of the appellant the dead body of the child aged about 1 ½ years was recovered.

11. It further appears that there is landed property dispute between the appellant and the informant, who appears to be a family member.

12. It further appears from the testimony of P.W.1, who has deposed that the dead body was recovered after the confession of the appellant regarding the location of the dead body.

13. We have examined the testimony of P.W.1 from which we have found that the appellant was compelled to come in a gathering of the villagers and, thereafter, the confession said to have been made by the appellant before the said gathering of the villagers. It has also come that the villagers were beating the appellant and the dead body has been recovered on the basis of the confession so made. The confession of the appellant, based upon which the dead body has been recovered are not on the separate sheet rather it has been disclosed in the presence of P.W.1 and other villagers.

14. The Investigating Officer, who has been examined as P.W.14 has deposed in his testimony that he has recorded the confessional statement of the appellant, but there is no confessional statement.

15. This Court, considering the fact that there is a landed property dispute between the appellant and the informant and also the fact that the dead body has been recovered on the basis o