The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish the commission of an offence, harbouring or concealing the known or believed offender, and the intention of screening from legal punishment under Section 212 IPC.

1. The petitioner stands charged for an offence under Section 212 read with 302 I.P.C. by the respondent Police.

2. The brief facts are stated below: One Subramanian arrayed as 1st accused is the husband of one Jayamani who is the deceased. The deceased was employed as Noon Meal Organizer in the Panchayat School. She was also attending the child birth and also used to terminate pregnancy as a mid-wife. The 1st accused who is her husband was running a homeopathy medicine shop.

3. According to the prosecution, A1 the husband of the deceased suspected her fidelity and frequently quarreled with her and to get rid of her planned to kill her. He got the assistance of 2nd accused by name Kumar who decoyed Jayamani to an isolated place and 2nd accused cut her neck and caused death. Later on, the 1st accused the husband of the deceased approached one Paranjothi who is his uncle arrayed as 3rd accused and informed him that he caused the death of his wife. The 3rd accused knowing that 1st accused had killed his wife, had harboured him for sometime and then took him to Chennai and made him remain in a lodge. Later on, the 1st accused approached this petitioner and told him that he committed the murder of his wife. The petitioner is arrayed as 4th accused, who is said to have harboured the 1st accused in his house and later on sent him to Thirupathi.

4. The petitioner is employed as a watchman in Thiyagadurugam Government Students Hostel. He was arrested on 29.03.2010 at 12.30 p.m., by the respondent police when he was on duty.

5. According to the petitioner, barring the confessional statement of 1st accused, there is absolutely no iota of evidence to connect the petitioner with the crime. The said confession statement cannot be relied upon by the respondent police as it is inadmissible in evidence.

6. Mr.A.Padmanaban, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is absolutely no material in the documents filed under Section 173(4) to connect the petitioner with the crime. There is no evidence to show that the 1st accused was found in the company of this petitioner. He would further submit that the 1st accused has surrendered himself before the Court and he was later on taken into police custody. The confession statement allegedly is given by the 1st accused, while in custody. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioner has been implicated without there being any legal admissible evidence.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that in order to sustain a charge against the petitioner for an offence under Section 212 IPC, first of all, there must be an offender who has to be harboured; that unless and until A1 is convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC, he will not become an "offender". He would submit that to attract the provisions of Section 212 IPC, it is necessary to establish commission of an offence; harbouring or concealing the person known or believed to be the offender; and further such concealment must be with the intention of screening him from legal punishment.

8. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel relied upon the decision reported in AIR (33) 1946 Patna 74 Ram Raj Chaudhury and another V. Emperor, wherein it is held that "Section 212 applies to the harbouring of persons who have actually committed an offence. It does not apply to the harbouring of persons not being criminals, who merely abscond to avoid or delay a judicial investigation. Therefore, where there is no evidence showing that the accused knew or had reason to believe that the person harboured had committed any offence, he cannot be convicted under Section 212 IPC."

9. Mr.A.Saravanan, the learned Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly admitted that there is no material to link the petitioner with the crime and he would submit that barring the confession statement there is no other material against the petitioner to implicate him for the offences charged against him under Section 212 IPC.

10. I