https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287684 A murder conviction based mainly on accomplice testimony requires independent corroboration in material particulars implicating the accused; accomplice evidence is admissible, but prudence demands reliable confirmation before guilt is fixed. A statement under Section 164 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot itself supply corroboration, while recovery evidence must actually connect the accused with the offence to be useful. A co-accused's confession under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act is admissible for consideration but is weak evidence and cannot by itself found a conviction. On the facts, the alleged corroborative circumstances were unsafe and no independent evidence implicated the accused, so the conviction could not stand. en-us Thu, 17 Feb 1949 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Apr 2020 16:45:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287684 A murder conviction based mainly on accomplice testimony requires independent corroboration in material particulars implicating the accused; accomplice evidence is admissible, but prudence demands reliable confirmation before guilt is fixed. A statement under Section 164 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot itself supply corroboration, while recovery evidence must actually connect the accused with the offence to be useful. A co-accused's confession under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act is admissible for consideration but is weak evidence and cannot by itself found a conviction. On the facts, the alleged corroborative circumstances were unsafe and no independent evidence implicated the accused, so the conviction could not stand. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Feb 1949 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287684