SC allows 64-year-old man walk free in case of murdering wife 40-yr ago [Read Judgment]

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has allowed a 64-year-old man to walk free in a case of murdering his wife 40 years ago, having noted that the High Court has wrongly relied upon extra judicial confession of the accused to overturn his acquittal by the trial court.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sanjay Karol set aside and quashed the Calcutta High Court's December 15, 2008 judgement which held Nikhil Chandra Mondal guilty in the 1983 case, saying the extra judicial confession was not trustworthy in the case.

The court noted that the prosecution case rested basically on the extrajudicial confession alleged to have been made by the appellant before Manick Pal, Pravat Kumar Misra and Kanai Saha, which the trial court found as contradictory to each other.

"It is a settled principle of law that extra-judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence. It has been held that where an extra-judicial confession is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, its credibility becomes doubtful and it loses its importance," the bench said.

The bench further pointed out that it is well-settled that it is a rule of caution where the court would generally look for an independent reliable corroboration before placing any reliance upon such extra-judicial confession. It has been held that there is no doubt that conviction can be based on extra-judicial confession, but in the very nature of things, it is a weak piece of evidence, the top court said.

The murder here was allegedly committed on March 11, 1983 in Burdwan district of West Bengal. The trial court on March 31, 1987, acquitted Mondal, who was charged with killing his wife, whose body was found near Railway Track aside Ambalgisan Railway Station.

In his plea before the top court, Mondal led by advocate Rukhsana Choudhury contended that the High Court has grossly erred in reversing the well-reasoned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court. After his conviction, Mondal had spent 13 years behind the bars.

Advocate Astha Sharma on behalf of the West Bengal government sought to defend the High Court's judgement.

The top court, in its findings, said the High Court in the case also relied on the recovery of the blood-stained clothes and the weapon which the trial court disbelieved as there was no memorandum statement of the accused as required under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and recovery of the knife was from an open place accessible to one and all.

"We find that the approach adopted by the trial court was in accordance with law. However, this circumstance which, in our view, could not have been used, has been employed by the High Court to seek corroboration to the extra-judicial confession," the bench said.
 

[Read Judgment]