Corroborating evidence is essential to accept a confession statement, and establishing motive and possession is crucial in murder cases.

M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.

1. This appeal challenges the judgment dated 20.10.2010 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri in S.C. No.04 of 2010, whereby the appellant shown as second accused stood charged, tried for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 201 read with 302 of the Indian Penal Code and accused 1, 3 to 5 stood charged, tried for the offences under Sections 147, 302 read with 149, and 201 read with 302 of the Indian Penal Code and found the second accused guilty as per the charge of murder and awarded punishment to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and acquitted the second accused in respect of other charges and acquitted accused 1, 3, 4 and 5 in respect of all charges.

2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of the case can be stated thus:

(i) P.W.1 is the brother of the deceased. The third accused is the wife of first accused. The second accused is the father of third accused and also fifth accused. The fourth accused is the brother of third accused. A month or two prior to the occurrence, the deceased, who developed illicit intimacy with the third accused, who is the wife of the first accused, eloped from the village. When it came to the knowledge of the villagers, they secured both of them, brought to the village and a panchayat was convened and a fine of Rs.50,000/- was imposed on the deceased and he has also paid the same. Thereafter, the deceased went to Bangalore along with his wife.

(ii) On 10th January, 2008, the deceased came to the village for attending the pongal festival. On 12.1.2008 at about 6 O' clock, in the morning hours, he took his cattles for grazing and he was just coming in the evening hours. At that time, all the five accused, in furtherance of common object of causind the death of the deceased Lakshmanan, attacked the deceased and caused his death and buried the dead body in the land, which was in the enjoyment of first accused.

(iii) On 16.1.2008, when P.W.3, who was ploughing the land, which was in the enjoyment of first accused, he found the dead body and immediately, he informed the same to P.W.1, who, in turn, informed the same to P.W.6 Village Administrative Officer and they found the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter, P.W.6 got complaint from P.W.1, which is marked as Ex.P1 and presented the same before the respondent-police. P.W.9 Sub Inspector of Police, on the strength of the said complaint, registered a case in Crime No.39 of 2008 for the offences under Sections 147, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Express First Information Report Ex.P12 was despatched to the Court.

(iv) On receipt of copy of the First Information Report, P.W.10 Inspector of Police, went to the place of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar Ex.P2 and rough sketch Ex.P13. P.W.8 Tahsildar, on receiving requisition letter from Eriyur Police Station, has conducted inquest on the dead body in the presence of witnesses and inquest report is marked as Ex.P10. Thereafter, she forwarded a requisition letter to the Doctor to conduct autopsy. P.W.7 Doctor conducted autopsy on the dead body and issued post-mortem Certificate Ex.P6 and Ex.P9 final opinion, where he has opined that the death would be caused due to head injury and due to shock and hemorrhage.

(v) Pending investigation, accused 1 and 5 were intercepted on 21st January, 2008, when they were going in a Two wheeler. The first accused escaped from the clutches and fifth accused was arrested, who gave confession statement voluntarily and the same was recorded in the presence of witnesses. He also produced M.O.1 Two Wheeler and the same was recovered under the cover of mahazar Ex.P3. Thereafter, he was sent for judicial remand. The first and second accused surrendered before the Judicial magistrate Court, Pennagaram. Both of them were taken to police custody after obtaining necessary orders. Thereafter, the second accused has given con