Inadmissible confession and complete circumstantial chain sustained murder conviction; death sentence reduced to life imprisonment.

A confession recorded during investigation by a second class magistrate not specially empowered was inadmissible, and oral proof of that confession was also barred. Even after excluding it, the conviction for murder was sustained because the circumstantial evidence formed a complete chain: the accused and deceased were alone in the house, the deceased was found murdered there, relations were strained, the weapon and surrounding facts connected the accused to the crime, and his explanation was unconvincing. The death sentence was interfered with and reduced to imprisonment for life because the circumstances showed a domestic quarrel arising from suspicion, making the extreme penalty unnecessary.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the confession recorded by a second class magistrate not specially empowered, and recorded during investigation, was admissible in evidence and whether the conviction could nonetheless be sustained on other evidence. (ii) Whether the sentence of death called for interference and reduction to life imprisonment.

Issue (i): Whether the confession recorded by a second class magistrate not specially empowered, and recorded during investigation, was admissible in evidence and whether the conviction could nonetheless be sustained on other evidence.

Analysis: A confession recorded during investigation by a second class magistrate not specially empowered is not admissible, and oral evidence to prove such confession is also barred. Even after excluding the confession, the record showed that the accused and the deceased were alone together in the house at the relevant time, the deceased was found murdered in that house, the accused had strained relations with her, the weapon and surrounding circumstances connected him with the crime, and his explanation was unconvincing. The chain of circumstances was sufficient to prove guilt.

Conclusion: The confession was inadmissible, but the conviction was rightly sustained on the basis of other evidence; this issue was decided against the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether the sentence of death called for interference and reduction to life imprisonment.

Analysis: The accused suspected the fidelity of the deceased and the circumstances showed a domestic quarrel arising out of that suspicion. In the facts and circumstances, the extreme penalty was considered unnecessary, and the ends of justice would be met by awarding the lesser punishment.

Conclusion: The sentence of death was reduced to imprisonment for life; this issue was decided in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The conviction for murder was maintained, but the punishment was altered from death to imprisonment for life, resulting in only partial relief to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: A confession recorded by an unauthorised magistrate during investigation is inadmissible, yet a conviction may still be upheld if independent circumstantial evidence forms a complete chain proving guilt; sentencing may be reduced where mitigating circumstances make the extreme penalty unnecessary.

---