Retracted confession and lack of corroboration defeat penalty where voluntariness is unproven and evidence remains inadequate.

A retracted confessional statement was held unsafe to rely on where it was promptly withdrawn after custody and the surrounding circumstances did not establish voluntariness free from inducement, threat or coercion. The tribunal further held that the alleged contraventions were not proved to the required standard because the material was not independently corroborated, the retracted statement could not by itself sustain liability, and denial of cross-examination weakened the evidentiary foundation. On that basis, the penalty order was not sustainable and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellant's confessional statement had been validly retracted and could be treated as voluntary. (ii) Whether the respondent had proved the alleged contraventions with the standard of proof required in the case.

Issue (i): Whether the appellant's confessional statement had been validly retracted and could be treated as voluntary.

Analysis: The retraction was made promptly after release from custody and was supported by contemporaneous communications. The surrounding circumstances did not show a voluntary confession. The record also did not reveal any convincing basis to treat the statement as free from inducement, threat or coercion.

Conclusion: The retracted confessional statement could not be safely treated as voluntary or reliable against the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether the respondent had proved the alleged contraventions with the standard of proof required in the case.

Analysis: The allegations were not supported by independent evidence sufficient to sustain the penalty. The material relied upon was inadequate, the retracted statement could not by itself sustain the finding, and denial of cross-examination further weakened the evidentiary basis. The legal approach to a retracted confession required careful consideration of the circumstances and corroboration.

Conclusion: The respondent failed to prove the contraventions to the required standard.

Final Conclusion: The penalty order could not be sustained and was set aside, leaving the appellant entitled to relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confession cannot form the sole basis of liability unless its voluntariness is established from the surrounding circumstances and the allegation is independently proved with reliable corroboration.

---