Extra-judicial confession not worth convicting person for murder; man set free after 8 years in jail

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court of Kar nataka set aside the order of conviction passed against an accused, sentencing him to imprisonment for life for the murder of a woman after it found that the conviction was based on an extra-judicial confession the accused allegedly made to a third party.

The prosecution had produced a witness (PW-8) who claimed to be a professional photographer.

“According to him, after two months of the incident, he had met the accused at Majestic and at that time, the accused confessed before him that he had murdered the deceased,” the HC noted.

However, it said that it was not enough to convict the accused for murder. “Though the trial Court has relied on this piece of evidence as extra judicial confession, in our view, the evidence of PW-8 does not satisfy the requirement of extra judicial confession so as to render the accused guilty of the murder of the deceased,” the HC said.

Durgasetty aka Durgi from Kanakapura, was charged with murder (Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code) and robb e r y (Section 398) by the Kodihalli police.

It was alleged that on December 5, 2009, he had murdered one Chikkakempamma at a plantation in Banagiridoddi village while she was grazing cattle.

After murdering her by assaulting her head with an iron chopper, he allegedly took away the gold ornaments she was wearing. After the trial, he was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 and also imposed a seven-year sentence under Section 398 in 2016.

He challenged it before the HC in 2017. The division bench of Justice KS Mudagal and Justice Venkatesh Naik T who heard his appeal gave their judgement recently.

The HC found that there was no eyewitness to the alleged crime and the trial court had believed the evidence of extra-judicial confession allegedly made before a photographer by the accused.

“Even if his evidence is believed, it would go to show that he met the accused by chance. There is nothing in the evidence to indicate that there was any transaction between PW-8 (witness) and the accused. They were neither friends nor relatives. There was a huge age difference between them. Nothing was elicited to show that the accused had implicit faith in PW-8. He was not in a position to help the accused,” the HC said.

The Court said the evidence of the photographer was not enough to prosecute the accused.

“Therefore, it cannot be believed that the accused would approach PW-8 and confess the alleged crime with him. The statement of PW-8 does not inspire confidence to hold that the accused had made such confession to PW-8,” the HC said.

Allowing the appeal and ordering for the release of Durgi, the HC said, “Even otherwise, when the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence, it is not safe to convict the accused based on a single circumstance.

The overall consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of clear view that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.”