Personal penalty cannot rest on an uncorroborated co-accused statement or a retracted admission.

Personal penalty could not be sustained on an uncorroborated co-accused's statement or on the appellant's retracted statement. The co-accused's statement, standing alone and unsupported by material particulars, was treated as insufficient to establish liability. The appellant's statement, retracted within eight days while he was in jail hospital, lost evidentiary value and was not treated as a clear admission that the recovered gold biscuits were meant for him. On that basis, the penalty was set aside and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the personal penalty imposed on the appellant could be sustained on the basis of a co-accused's statement and the appellant's retracted statement.

Analysis: The material against the appellant consisted principally of the statement of a co-accused and the appellant's own statement, which was retracted within eight days while the appellant was in jail hospital. A co-accused's statement, without corroboration in material particulars, was held insufficient to found a penalty. The retracted statement was treated as having lost evidentiary value, and it did not amount to an admission that the gold biscuits recovered from the co-accused were meant for the appellant.

Conclusion: The penalty could not be sustained and was set aside in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the personal penalty was annulled.

Ratio Decidendi: A personal penalty cannot rest solely on an uncorroborated co-accused's statement or on a retracted statement that does not constitute a clear admission of liability.

---