Co-accused confession cannot found conviction; principal charges fail, but disappearance of evidence conviction survives on independent proof.

A co-accused's confession could not, by itself, sustain conviction for murder, conspiracy or kidnapping, because such confession is not evidence in the ordinary sense and can only lend assurance to otherwise reliable independent material. The surrounding circumstances did not satisfactorily prove the appellant's participation in the principal offences, so those convictions were set aside. The evidence did establish assistance in disposing of the body and tying the gunny bag, and the confession could corroborate that limited inference. Conviction for causing disappearance of evidence under Section 201 IPC was therefore upheld and the sentence confined to that offence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the confession of a co-accused could, by itself or with the other evidence, sustain the appellant's conviction for murder, conspiracy and kidnapping; (ii) Whether the proved facts nevertheless established the appellant's liability for causing disappearance of evidence.

Issue (i): The confession of a co-accused is not evidence in the ordinary sense and cannot form the foundation of conviction. It may only lend assurance to otherwise trustworthy evidence. The surrounding circumstances, including alleged prior association, last-seen evidence, and the evidence regarding the appellant's presence and conduct, were scrutinised independently of the confession. The remaining evidence did not satisfactorily establish the appellant's participation in the murder or the allied charges.

Conclusion: The conviction for murder, conspiracy and kidnapping was unsustainable and was set aside.

Issue (ii): The evidence did establish that the appellant assisted in the disposal of the body and in tying the gunny bag, and the co-accused's confession could be used to lend assurance to that limited inference. On that basis, the appellant's conduct fell within the offence of causing disappearance of evidence.

Conclusion: The conviction under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code was upheld and the sentence was confined to that offence.

Final Conclusion: The appellant was acquitted of the principal charges but remained liable only for the offence relating to disappearance of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: A confession of a co-accused can only corroborate or lend assurance to other reliable evidence and cannot, by itself, sustain a conviction; where the independent evidence falls short on the principal charge, conviction can survive only to the extent clearly proved by the remaining admissible evidence.

---