Retacted confession corroboration sustains conviction where recovery evidence is reliable and official witnesses are intrinsically trustworthy.

A retracted confession may support conviction when it is materially corroborated by reliable recovery evidence, and the testimony of official witnesses cannot be discarded merely because they are customs officers if it is intrinsically trustworthy. Recoveries of smuggled goods were proved by Customs officials, a police officer and an independent witness, and the absence of a locality witness did not undermine the search evidence where the recoveries were from secluded places and the witnesses were consistent. The High Court erred in rejecting that corroboration, and the conviction and sentence were restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the respondents by rejecting the corroborative value of the recoveries and search evidence supporting their confessional statements before Customs .

Analysis: The confessions made before the Customs authorities were retracted, so the trial court treated them as requiring corroboration in material particulars. The recoveries of smuggled goods at the instance of the respondents were proved by the evidence of Customs officials, a police officer, and an independent witness. The absence of a locality witness did not, by itself, make the search evidence unreliable, particularly where the recoveries were from secluded places and the evidence of the witnesses was found consistent and intrinsically credible. The High Court had not properly examined the substance of the testimony and erred in discarding the corroboration.

Conclusion: The High Court's acquittal was unsustainable; the confessional statements stood sufficiently corroborated by the recovery evidence, and the conviction and sentence were restored.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confession may form the basis of conviction when it is materially corroborated by reliable evidence of recovery, and official witnesses cannot be rejected merely because they are customs officers if their testimony is intrinsically trustworthy.

---