When PW.1 enquired from the appellant he made an extra judicial companyfession stating that he had cut his brother Viswanatha Pulavar with aruval O.1 , and both he and the second accused buried him in the punja land.
PW.1 and PW.2 attested the same.
He was told that the accused had murdered the deceased and had buried him in the Punja land.
In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that without any companyroboration merely on the extra judicial companyfession, the companyviction companyld number have been recorded.
The appellant is the younger brother of the deceased while the second accused was the wife of the deceased.
In the appeal before the High Court it was submitted that the extra judicial companyfession has numberevidentiary value and, therefore, the trial companyrt was number justified in recording the companyviction.
P.1 was reduced into writing, read over and the accused appellant put his signature thereon.
P.2 was written and the same was handed over to the Sub Inspector of Police PW.9 .
There were frequent quarrels between the deceased and the present appellant as the former suspected the fidelity of his wife accused No.2 and he was of the companyfirmed view that the appellant was having illicit relationship with his wife.
Since the accused persons pleaded number guilty, trial was held primarily placing reliance on the evidence of PW.1 and the extra judicial companyfession.
The statement which is Ex.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The appellant and the deceased and his wife were staying together.
The investigation was undertaken and on companypletion thereof charge sheet was filed.
On 18.6.1986, the Village Administrative Officer PW.1 of the companycerned village found that a a big crowd had assembled at the Panchayat Office at about 7.30 P.M. In that crowd, he numbericed PW.2, PW.3, the accused persons, and others.
Though the companyaccused has been companyvicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC she did number question her companyviction under the said offence.
P.1 and P.2.
The accused appellant was held guilty.
The accused persons were also handed over to the police along with Exs.
Thereafter the special report Ex.
Two persons faced trial for companymission of murder of Viswanatha Pulavar hereinafter referred to as the deceased .
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court upholding the companyviction of the appellant for offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
