RUPANI CHANDRIAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard, Mr. Praveen Kumar, learned Counsel representing the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The simple and sole question which had been elaborately argued is that whether on the basis of the alleged extra judicial confession said to have been made by the accused to P.W.-1 V.A.O. in the absence of any other corroboration and especially in the light of the doubt cast in view of the medical evidence, can conviction be sustained on such uncorroborated testimony of P.W.1. Both the counsel made elaborate submissions on this aspect. Sri Praveen Kumar, on one hand contending that on the strength of such evidence the conviction cannot be sustained in the absence of any corroboration and strong reliance was also placed on a decision of the Appex Court in State of Haryana v. Jagbir Singh and another and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitting that VAO being an independent person having no animosity as against appellant-accused, the finding recorded by the learned judge to be confirmed.

(3.) This Criminal Appeal is filed by the sole appellant-accused as against the Judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda in S.C.No. 153 of 1996 on 14th September, 1998. The accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, but however, he was found guilty under Section 304 Part 1 IPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of seven years and also to pay fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to suffer S.I. for one week.