2006 Supreme(All) 2252

[2006(8) ADJ 12 NOC]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : BARKAT ALI ZAIDI, J.
BHAGWAT SARAN ......Applicant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. .....Opposite Party
(Criminal Misc. Application No. 8275 of 2006, decided on 23rd August, 2006)

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Criminal proceedings—Discharge from—Prime contention of applicant is that he has been implicated only on basis of statement of other co-accused and statement of other co-accused is inadmissible in law—Sustainability of—In view of Supreme Court decision in Rameshwar’s case accused can be convicted on an uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice—Although it is not safe to do so as given in Illustration (b) of Section 114 of Evidence Act—But Judge must follow rule of caution in mind and proceed to give reason for considering it unnecessary to require corroboration on fact of particular case before him—Show why he considers safe to convict him without corroboration—However, such question of fact cannot be considered in proceedings under Section 482 of Cr PC—Application dismissed.

       (B) Evidence Act, 1872—Section 114, Illustration (b)—Scope of—Law relating to accomplice evidence—Whether accused can be convicted on an uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice—Rule is that it is not safe to do so as given in Illustration (b) of Section 114—It must be present to mind of Judge and he must give some indication in judgment that he had this rule of caution in mind—Should give reason for considering it unnecessary to require corroboration on facts of case before him.