Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8
PETITIONER:
NAND KUMAR & OTHERS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
03/05/1962
BENCH:
ACT:
Criminal Trial-- Retracted confession-- Corroboration--
sufficiency.
HEADNOTE:
The appellants were convicted under s. 302 Indian Penal Code
and also s. 377 and s. 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The
Trial Court and the High Court had based the convict ions on
the retracted confessions of each of the first three app-
ellants supported by other circumstances in evidence and o
circumstantial and other evidence in the case of the fourt-
appellant. On special leave it was contended that the con
fessions of the first three appellants were not voluntary
and even if voluntarily they were not sufficiently
corroborated by other circumstances and that the conviction
of the fourth appellant was not based on sufficient
evidence.
Held , that what is sufficient corroboration for this
purpose has to be decided in each case on its own facts and
circumstances. It may, however, be generally stated that
where the prosecution by the production of reliable evidence
which is independent of the confession and which is also not
tainted
891
evidence like the evidence of an accomplice or the evidence
of a co-accused, establishes the truth of certain parts of
the account given in the confession and these parts are so
integrally connected with other parts of the accused’s
confession, that a prudent judge of facts would think it
reasonable to believe, in view of the established truth of
these parts, that what the accused has stated in the
confession as regards his own participation in the crime is
also true, that is sufficient corroboration. More than this
is not needed; less than this is ordinarily insufficient.
Held, further, that in the case of the first three
appellants there was sufficient corroboration and that there
was sufficient evidence in the case of the fourth appellant.
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 181 of
1961.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated
October 14, 1961, of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B. Cr.
As. Nos. 263, 264, 278 and 280 to 282 and D. B. Cr. (Death
Sentence and confirmation) Case No. 5 of 1961.
O.C. Chatterjee, Renu Chatterjee and S. N. Mukherjee, for
the appellants.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8
A.S. B. Chari, Kan Singh and P. D. Menon, for the
respondent.
1962. May 3. The following Judgment of the Court was
delivered by
DAS GUPTA, J.-On June 4, 1960 eight boys (1) Munna son of
Manohar Lal; (2) Ram Prakash son of Ram Baboo; (3) Laxmi
son of Vidhya Ram; (4) Pooran son of Gulab Chand; (5)
Kedar son of Ram Kumar; (6) Mohan son of Banke Lal; (7)
Suresh son of Chandra Shekhar and (8) Jagdish son of Mitthan
Lal, all of Dholpur City went to the temple of Mangal Bharti
for a Picnic. None of them returned home. On the morning
of June 6, all these boys were found dead near a well in
Gundarai forest. Each of the bodies bore numerous injuries,
which according to the evidence of
892
doctor, who held the post mortem examination, caused the
deaths. Seven of the bodies were found naked; only the dead
body of Munna had clothes on. The hands of each were tied
from behind with ribbons of their trousers and their mouths
were found gagged. Watches and rings, buttons and currency
notes, which some of these boys had with them had
disappeared.
The four appellants, viz., Nand Kumar, Brij Kishore, alias
Kalua, Lakhan and Murari along with one Jagdish were all
convicted for the murder of these eight boys under s. 302 of
the Indian Penal Code and were all sentenced to death. All
of them were also convicted by the additional Sessions Judge
under a. 377 of the Indian penal Code and s. 395, Indian
Penal Code.
The conviction of these four appellants under s. 302 was
confirmed by the High- Court of Rajasthan and the sentences
of. death passed on Nand Kumar, Kalua and Lakhan were also
confirmed. The High Court reduced the sentence on Murari to
one of imprisonment for life. The conviction of all the
appellants under s. 395 of the Indian Penal Code and the
sentences passed thereunder were also confirmed. The pre-
sent appeal is by special leave granted by this Court.
The prosecution case is that when the eight boys were at
Mangal Bharti temple on June 4, 1960 these four appellants
and Jagdish joined them there. In the evening before they
all left the temple, these appellants took Munna and his
seven companions one by one into a narrow lane behind the
temple and robbed them of their belongings and valueable by
force. All the 13 then left the temple to get her but
instead of returning to Dholpur City, the appellants took
the boys to the Gundarai forest. It is said that before
the appellants
893
took the boys to Gundarai they had agreed among themselves
to murder them. They all waited near a. pillar till about
9.30 p.m. after which while Jagdish and Murari remained near
the boys to St keep watch over them Jagdish being armed
with a gun first of all Munna was called away from the
other boys and. killed by the other three, viz., Nand Kumar,
Kalua and Lakhan. The other seven were also taken away one
by one and killed by these three. For these killings they
used a knife which belonged to Murari and which Murari had
brought with him on that day. After all the eight boys had
been killed the booty was distributed among these five.
Nand Kumar took in his share an agfa camera which had been
taken from Munna and also Munna’s wrist watch; Lakhan got a
wrist watch and a ring which had belonged-to Ram Prakash;
Kalua’s share was a wrist watch belonging to Laxmi Chand and
also a ring which belonged to him. Murari got four bottons
and some money in cash and Jagdish also got some buttons and
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8
cash.
The relatives of the boys had become anxious when the boys
did not return on the night of June 4 Information was
received from Puran, also of Dholpur City, who had also gone
to the Mangal Bharti on that day that he had seen the eight
boys and also Nand Kumar, Kalua, Jagdish .and Murari
together at the Mangal Bharti. Enquiries were then made at
the houses of these five but they were all found absent. On
the following morning, i.e., the 5th June, 1960 at 6 a.m.,
Shiv Narain, the brother of Munna lodged information with
the Kotwali police Dholpur about the disappearance of these
boys. He added his suspicion that these boys might have
fallen into the hands of dacoits belonging to the Panna
dacoit’s gang and kidnaped by them. On the same day at
about 10 p.m. Bhanwar Singh, the Circle Inspector of
894
Dholpur succeeded in contacting these appellants.
Ultimately all the five made statements which were
recorded,’. giving information about their having kept the
articles taken from some of the boys. At about 4 a.m. on
June 6, 1960, the Circle Inspector accompanied by the Deputy
Superintendent of Police left for Gundarai forest in a
police jeep a long with the appellant Nand Kumar and some
other persons. Nand Kumar led the police to the top of a
small bill and pointed out the five cycles of Munna and his
companions lying at one spot and the dead bodies of the
eight boys lying at different places in the vicinity of the
hill in the jungle. He also took out a knife, Ex- 18, from
a bush near one of the dead bodies. Then Nand Kumar went to
his house with the police and there pointed out a camera and
a wrist watch which had fallen to his share. He also
brought out certain blood-stained clothes. After this. the
appellant Murari was taken by the police to his house and he
brought out a gold ring with the name of R.P. Gupta
inscribed in enamel., a wrist watch belonging to R. P. Gupta
deceased and some bloodstained clothes. The police then
took Murari to his house where Murari brought out some gold
buttons and currency notes. Then Kalua took the police to
his house and brought out a wrist. watch and a ring inscri-
bed with the name of S. K. Gupta and also some blood stained
clothes. According to the prosecution three of these
appellants, viz., Nand Kumar.Murari and Kalua made
confessions before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which were
recorded by the Magistrate Nand Kumar on the 14th June,
Kalua on the 15th June and Murari on the 16th June. A
statement of Lakhan was also recorded by the Magistrate on
the 15th June, 1960.
All the accused pleaded not guilty. They denied that they
had made any statement at all before
895
the Magistrate and also denied the recovery of any articles
from their houses.
The conviction of each of the three appellants, Nand Kumar,
Kalua and Murari on the charge of murder was based by the
Trial Court and the High Court on the confession said to
have been made by him taken with the circumstances which the
Courts below considered sufficient corroboration to
established the truth of what was stated in the confession.
On behalf of each of these appellants it has been contended
before us that the confession was not voluntary and was not
admissible in evidence, and secondly, that there was not
sufficient corroboration to establish the truth of the
confession. On behalf of Nand Kumar an additional plea was
pressed that he made no confessional statement at all before
the Magistrate and the document which is now produced as
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8
record of his confessional statement was written up in his
absence on papers on which Nand Kumar has been made to put
his signature. The argument of the learned Counsel, so far
as we can understand it was that the jail register entry
showing 1.25 as the time when Nand Kumar was brought back to
the jail on the 14th June 1960 was originally 10.25 but had
been dishonestly altered to 1.25 by erasing the zero.
Proceeding on the basis that 10.25 was the time noted the
learned Counsel argues that this shows that Nand Kumar was
not before the Magistrate from 10.30 onwards when according
to the record of the confession, Ex-62, the Magistrate was
recording his confession. In the first place we do not find
any reasonable ground for the thinking that the entry
originally made was 10.26. As the entry stands, it is 1. 25
and there is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise to
indicate that it was not so all along’ Even supposing it was
originally 10.25 and then altered to 1.25 the only
reasonable conclusion would be, if the Magistrate’s own
evidence on the presence of the accused before
896
-him is taken into consideration, that somebody had made a
mistake in making the entry and then corrected it to 1.25.
We agree with the High Court that there is absolutely no
reason to about the testimony of the Magistrate on this
point and there can be no possible doubt whatsoever that the
record Ex-P-62 contains’ what was stated by the accused Nand
Kumar before the Magistrate on June 14, 1960.
As regards each of these confessions, the learned Counsel
has urged, as already, indicated, that it was not voluntary.
Three grounds were urged in support of the contention. They
are, (1) that there was a delay of about a week or more in
sending the accused to the Magistrate for recording the
confessions; (2) that Circle Inspector Paras Singh ’visited
the Judicial lock up, where these confessing accused had
been kept on the 13th June; and (3) that the confessing
accused had been kept in solitary cells. that any enquiry
was made from the Investigating officer as to why he did not
send up the accused for recording his confession earlier.
But, if, as is suggested by the learned Counsel, the accused
persons were ready to make their confessional statements
before the Magistrate as early as the 6th June, it is not
clear to us what the police stood to gain by delaying the
recording of these confessions. On the contrary, it would
seem natural for the police to hurry up with the recording
of the confessions lest on second thoughts the accused might
refuse to make the statement. In considering the visit of
Paras Singh to the judicial lock-up on the 13th June we have
to remember that though Paras Singh was not examined as a
witness by the prosecution the prosecution did offer to
examine him when in the course of the argument a grievance
was sought to be made by the defence of
897
such non-examination. The Sessions Judge was prepared to
examine him as a Court witness but the defence objected to
it. It is not open, therefore, to the Defence Counsel now
to complain that Paras Singh was not examined.
It is not disputed that Paras Singh did visit the judicial
look-up on the 13th June. From the petition on, which the
order permitting him to visit the jail was made, it is
reasonable to think, however, that this visit was made for
steps in the investigation in some other case having no
connection with The present accused. No doubt, as regards
the voluntary nature of the confessions, therefore, arises
from this visit of Paras Singh to the judicial lock-up on
the 13th June.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8
’Nor can any conclusion be reasonably based on this point
from the fact that the accused persons were kept in solitary
cells. Such keeping in solitary calls is often considered
prudent by the jail authorities for the safety of the
confessing accused themselves. It is true that by being
kept in the solitary cells an accused is kept away from the
influence of other under-trial prisoners who might try to
induce them to resile them from the confession, but it is no
ground for thinking that when a particular accused had been
kept is a so solitary cell the confession made by him was
not voluntary.
We are satisfied that the confessions of all these three
accused were voluntary and rightly admitted into evidence.
Each of the accused however retracted the confession made by
him. Courts ordinarily consider it unsafe to convict any
accused person on the basis of his retracted confession
except where the truth of such confession is established by
corroboration in material particular by independent
evidence., what is sufficient corroboration for this purpose
has to be decided in
898
each case on its own facts and circumstances. It may,
however, be generally stated that where the prosecution by
the production of reliable evidence which is independent of
the confession and which is also not tainted evidence like
the evidence of an accomplice or the evidence of a co-
accused, establishes the truth of certain parts of the
account given in the confession and these parts are so
integrally connected with other parts of the accused’s
confess. ion, that a prudent judge of facts would think it
reasonable to believe, in view of the established truth of
these parts, that what the accused has stated in the
confession as regards his own participation in the crime is
also true, that is sufficient corroboration. More than this
is not needed, less than this is ordinarily insufficient.
Applying this test to the three retracted confessions before
us, we are satisfied that the High Court was right in its
conclusion that each of these confessions has been so well
corroborated- by independent evidence in material
particulars that what the accused has said in the confession
as regards his own participation in the crime has been
proved to be true.
Turning first to Nand Kumar’s confession, we find that after
describing how with the offer four accused persons he went
to Mangal Bharti with a gun which belonged to one Fakhruddin
and took part in the picnic with the 8 boys, Munna and his
companions there, goes on to say about the conspiracy to rob
these boys of their valuables and then actually robbing them
of these valuables. He further states in the confession how
they further conspired to take all the boys "under the
pretext of sight seeing walk (Sair ka Bahana) and saying
them to reach the city en-route Gundarai and Barakhambha and
to return their articles there and to murder them after
taking them to some lonely place"
899
took the boys to Gundarai and there how one by one all the 8
boys were killed by himself Kalua and Lakhan stabbing them
with the knife which Murari had brought. He further stated
that after the boys had been murdered the booty was distri-
buted among themselves and he took in his share Munnas Agfa
camera and a wrist watch belonging to Munna. Not only has
the prosecution established by independent evidence that
Nand Kumar with the other accused went to Mangal Bharti and
met the 8 boys there and remained with them for some time
taking part in the picnic, but it has further been proved by
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8
reliable and independent evidence that Munna’s Agfa camera
and the wrist watch belonging to him which he had taken with
him that day to Mangal Bharti were recovered from Nand
Kumar’s house and that it was actually he who produced these
himself from behind the floor carpet on the Tand of his
house and that he also produced some clothes lying behind
the floor carpet, viz , a white banian and a langot and a
white shirt smeared with blood. There is satisfactory
evidence that the blood on these articles was human blood.
It is necessary to mention also that the fact that hi) had
knowledge of where the dead bodies were, was discovered by a
statement made by him before the police, which has been
rightly admitted into evidence under s. 27 of the Evidence
Act and on the morning of June 6, 1960 it was he who took
the police party to the place where the bodies were. The
knife, Ex. 18, was also pointed out by him from under a bush
near one of the dead bodies after he had previously stated
that he had left the knife at the place of occurrence.
These facts and circumstances provide overwhelming
corroboration of Nand Kumar’s confession that he was one of
the three persons who inflicted the injuries on the 8 boys
which caused their deaths. He has therefore, been
900
rightly convicted under s.302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Kalua also confessed having been one of the three who
inflicted knife injuries on some of the boys and having held
some of the other boys while his companions, Nand Kumar and
Lakhan inflicted the injuries. Besides describing the visit
to the Mangal Bharti and meeting the eight boys there he
also spoke about robbing the boys of their belongings and
thereafter about the conspiracy to kill the boys after
taking them to Gundarai. He went on to say in the
confession how the boys were taken to Gundarai and murdered
there. He further stated about the distribution of the
booty and said that be got in his share the wrist watch
belonging to Laxmi and the ring on which the name of S.K.
Gupta was written. Kalua’s presence at the Mangal Bharti
and meeting the eight boys there have been proved by
independent evidence. It has also been established by
reliable independent evidence that the wrist watch of Laxmi
and also his ring, which originally belonged to his brother
Sri Kishan Gupta and so bore the inscription S. K. Gupta,
were recovered from Kalua’s house and that it was Kalua
himself who produced these from inside a box on a Tand in
his house and further that Kalua himself produced a trouser
and a shirt from behind another box lying behind the same
Tand both of which articles had blood marks. It has been
established satisfactorily that the blood was human blood.
These facts and circumstances provide sufficient
corroboration of Kalua’s confession. He has, therefore,
been rightly convicted under s.302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Murari also spoke in his confession of bow he went to Mangal
Bharti and met the eight boys; about the conspiracy to rob
the boys of their belongings and how they were actually
robbed and thereafter of the conspiracy of taking the boys
to
Gundarai and killing them there. He also spoke in his
confession of bow after the boys were taken to Gundarai
forest the boys were called one by one and killed while he
and Jagdish remained guard over the boys when they were
waiting for their turn to be called. He has mentioned in
his confession about his taking his own knife with him and
has also stated that this knife was used in committing the
murders’ Speaking about the distribution of the booty he
said that he got in his share four buttons, one of which was
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8
completely of gold while the other three were gold topped.
Independent evidence has established in addition to Murari’s
presence at Mangal Bharti and his meeting with the eight
boys there, the recovery of four such buttons and Rs. 48/-
in currency notes and that it was Murari himself who
produced these buttons and the notes from inside a box in a
room after he himself made a statement, which was rightly
admitted under s. 27 of the Evidence Act, about having kept
these things in his house. The knife (Ex-18’ which was
found near one of the dead bodies was also indentified by
witness Ram Singh (P.W. 14) as the knife which he had seen
Murari carrying before the occurrence. It is not an
ordinary knife. It is a long knife of which the blade is 6
inches long and the handle 7 inches, with a special button
arrangement on pressing which it opens and closes.
These facts and circumstances established by independent
evidence provide sufficient corroboration of Murari’s own
confession that in furtherance of a common intention of
himself and his companions to kill these eight boys he kept
guard over the boys when one by one they were being called
away and killed by his companions. Nand Kumar, Kalua and
Lakhan. He has, therefore, been rightly convicted under
s.302 of the Indian Penal Code,
902
The fourth appellant, Lakhan, did not confess having
participated in any of the crimes. To prove the charge
under s.302 of the Indian Penal Code against him the
prosecution relied on a number of circumstances. (1) His
presence with Nand Kumar and others at Mangal Bharti and
meeting the eight boys there; (2) the recovery from his room
of part of the booty taken from the boys, viz., a gold ring
bearing the inscription R. P. Gupta, and a wrist watch; (3)
the recovery of a blood-stained banian and underwear from
his room and (4) the fact that these were produced by Lakhan
himself after he had made a statement that he kept these
things in his house. Along with this the prosecution wants
the .court to take into consideration the statement made in
the retracted confessions of Nand Kumar, Kalua and Murari
that Lakhan took actual part in the killing of the eight
boys. The circumstances mentioned above have clearly been
established by legal evidence and they themselves are almost
sufficient, without anything more, to justify a conclusion
that Lakhan took part in the killing of the eight boys in
furtherance of the common intention of himself and other to
cause. their deaths. It is proper and quite permissible to
take into consideration, then, the statements made as
regards the part taken by him in the retracted confessions
of Nand Kumar, Kalua and Murari. These statements supply
whatever assurance was needed to convince the court that
Lakhan took part in the killing of the eight boys in
furtherance of the common intention of himself and others.
His conviction under’ s.302, Indian Penal Code was,
therefore, fully-justified.
Some argument was addressed to us on the question of motive.
It has been urged that while according to the confessions
Nand Kumar and other decided to kill these boys so that they
might not speak about the crimes already committed by the
accused, viz., dacoity and sedomy, the learned
903
judges of the High Court seemed to think that Munna was
killed by Nand Kumar as an act of revenge for the insult he
had offered to Nand Kumar’s sister and the other seven boys
were killed so that they might not speak about this murder
of Munna. The evidence in the present case is so clear to
show that these four persons committed the murder of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8
eight boys that we think it unnecessary to speculate about
the motive which induced them to murder the eight boys who
had done no harm. Whether it was sadistic pleasure or the
fear of discovery of robbory, or anything else, the fact
remains proved by overwhelming evidence that these four did
actually commit the murder of the eight innocent boys.
It is hardly necessary to say anything about the conviction
of these persons of an offence under s. 395 of the Indian
Penal Code. It is sufficient to mention only that the
evidence discussed above in connection with the charge of
murder provides sufficient basis for the convictions under
a. 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
The sentences of death passed on Nand Kumar, Kalua and
Lakhan are the only possible sentences. The High Court has
thought fit to treat Murari more leniently and sentenced him
only to imprisonment for life. We cannot interfer with that
sentence, even though it appears to us that this leniency
was uncalled for.
The appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
904