Supreme Court acquits appellant, stresses corroboration, questions eyewitness reliability.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant. The Court emphasized the necessity of corroboration in cases of retracted confessions and highlighted concerns regarding the reliability of eye-witness testimonies, identification parades, and the adequacy of the investigation. The judgment underscores the importance of thorough and reliable evidence to ensure justice in criminal cases.

---

---

Issues: Conviction based on retracted confession, reliability of eye-witnesses, necessity of corroboration, adequacy of investigation, identification parades, intrinsic material in confession

In this case, the appellant was convicted of murder based on three eye-witnesses and a retracted confession. The Additional Sessions Judge disbelieved two eye-witnesses and rejected the confession as involuntary, but relied on the third eye-witness for conviction. The High Court found all eye-witnesses unreliable but upheld the conviction solely on the confession, acquitting the co-accused due to lack of corroboration. The Supreme Court analyzed the case, emphasizing the need for corroboration in cases of retracted confessions, especially considering the circumstances of this case. They highlighted the lack of prior acquaintance between the witnesses and accused, raising doubts about the delayed arrests and the adequacy of the investigation.

Moreover, the Supreme Court scrutinized the identification parades held two and a half months after the incident, casting suspicion on the reliability of the identification process. They cautioned against accepting identifications made under questionable circumstances. The Court refrained from setting strict rules on corroboration but stressed its necessity in this particular case due to various uncertainties and inconsistencies. They also noted additional doubts raised by the conduct of witnesses and the lack of crucial witness testimonies, questioning the intrinsic material in the confession cited by the High Court.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and acquitting the appellant. The judgment underscores the importance of corroborative evidence in cases involving retracted confessions and highlights the need for a thorough and reliable investigation to ensure justice.

---