SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1979 Supreme(Ori) 43

ORISSA HIGH COURT
R. N. MISRA AND P. K. MOHANTI, JJ.
GADHAPURNI
VERSUS
THE STATE
Jail Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1977,
Decided on : 27 -8 -1979.

For a statement to be considered a confession, it must amount to a clear acknowledgment of guilt and relate to the particular crime with which the accused is charged.

Headnote:

Confession - Murder of Newly Born Child - The court held that the appellant's statements did not amount to a confession as she did not make any clear acknowledgment of guilt or admission relating to the particular crime with which she was charged. The order of conviction based on the so-called confession was not sustainable.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under Section 302 I. P. C. for allegedly giving birth to an illegitimate child and causing its death by throttling. The conviction was based solely on the so-called extrajudicial confession of the appellant before witnesses.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant's statements before the witnesses did not amount to a confession as she did not make any clear acknowledgment of guilt or admission relating to the particular crime with which she was charged. The order of conviction based on the so-called confession was not sustainable, and the appeal was allowed, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.

Issues: The issues revolved around the admissibility of the appellant's statements as a confession and whether they constituted a clear acknowledgment of guilt or admission relating to the specific crime with which she was charged.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that to constitute a confession, the statement must amount to a clear acknowledgment of guilt and relate to the particular crime with which the accused is charged. Any admission not connected with the ingredients of the offense charged would not amount to a confession.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charge under Section 302 I. P. C. She was directed to be set at liberty forthwith.

JUDGEMENT

P.k. Mohanti, J. :- This is a prisoner's appeal presented through the Superintendent of Jail against her conviction under Section 302 I. P. C. and the sentence of imprisonment for life.

2. Accusation against the appellant was that she gave birth to an illegitimate child and caused its death by throttling on 25-1-75. The dead body of the child was found lying on the threshing floor of one Bhima Meher of Rampur. The Grama Rakhi of the village lodged information at the Police Station and a U. D. case was started. Investigation revealed that it was a case of murder. The appellant is alleged to have made an extra-judicial confession before P. Ws. 3 and 6. After investigation, she was charge-sheeted under S. 302, I. P. C.

3. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. She denied having made any confession before P. Ws. 3 and 6. She also denied having given birth to the child.

4. The doctor P. W. 1 performed post mortem examination over the dead body and opined that the child was born alive and it was killed by throttling. The doctor's evidence leaves no room for doubt that the death was homicidal. This was also not disputed by the appellant.

5. There is no direct evidence of any eyewitness to the factum of murder. The order of conviction is based solely on the so-called extrajudicial confession of the appellant before P. Ws. 3 and 6.

6. The relevant portions of the evidence of P. Ws. 3 and 6 are extracted below :-

P. W. 3, Lokanath Meher :- "Seeing the dead body I told the accused that the villagers were suspecting her and enquired from her as to whether she had given birth to any child and had thrown the dead body. The accused in reply stated to me that sometime in the month of Baisakh, prior to Pousa she had illicit connection with an unknown man as a result of which she became pregnant"

P. W. 6, Ramesh Chandra Meher :- "During the winter 2 years back the accused confessed before me that she had illicit connection with one unknown man and became pregnant and delivered a dead child on the previous night whom she threw out."

7. The expression "confession" has not been defined in the Evidence Act. Stephen in his Digest of the Law of Evidence defines it thus :-

"A confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged with crime, stating or suggesting the inference that he committed the crime."

This definition was modified by the Privy Council holding that only a direct acknowledgment of guilt should be regarded as a confession, A confession must either admit in terms the offence, or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact, even a conclusively incriminating fact, is not of itself a confession vide Narayan Swami v. Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47.

8. To make an admission a confession, it must amount to a clear acknowledgment of guilt. A confession must relate to the particular crime with which the accused is charged. Any admission which is not connected with any of the ingredients of the offence charged would not amount to a confession.

9. In the instant case, the accused was charged with having committed the offence of murder of her newly born child and nothing else. The evidence of P. Ws. 3 and 6 extracted above would show that the appellant did not make any admission that she had caused the death of her child. Therefore, her statement before P. Ws. 3 and 6 does not amount to a confession so far as this trial is concerned. The learned Sessions Judge fell into an error in holding that the appellant's statements before P. Ws. 3 and 6 to the effect that she became pregnant by illicit connection with an unknown man amounted to a confession. The evidence of P. W. 6 shows that the appellant stated before him to have delivered a dead child. Thus, it is clear that there was no acknowledgment of guilt. The order of conviction based on the so-called confession is not sustainable.

10. We allow the appeal, set aside the conviction and the sentence and acquit the appellan


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top