BHERU SINGH S/0 KALYAN SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: [1994] 1 S.C.R. 559 · Decided: 04-02-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, FAIZAN UDDIN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

( 
' 
BHERU SINGH S/0 KALYAN SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
FEBRUARY 4, 1994 
[DR. AS. ANAND AND FAIZAN-UDDIN, JJ.] 
A 
B 
The Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 302-Murder-Accused com-
mitted murders of his wife and five children-Lodged first infonnatiOIJ report 
himself disclosing motive of crime, manner in which he committed crime, and 
produced weapon used in crime-Confession recorded under Section 164 C 
Cr.P.C.-TriaJ-Judicial confession retracted-Testimony of eye- witness and 
other witnesses fally supporting prosecution case and corroborating conf es-
sional statement-Trial Court convicted accused of offence of murder and 
sentenced him to death-Conviction upheld by High Court and sentence con-
finned-Held, the ocular testimony of eye-witness could by itself fonn basis 
for convictiorr-There is sufficient corroboration to voluntary confessional D 
statement-Courts below rightly convicted accused of offence-Sentence of 
death imposed upon accused confinned. 
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Sections 8, 21, 25, 27-First informa-
tion report lodged by accused making confessiorr-Admissibility-Held, F.LR._ E 
is not a wholly confessional statement-That part which does not amount to 
confession and gi.ves inf onnation to police admissible against accused as 
evidence of his conduct under s. 8 and to the extent it is non-confessional in 
nature it would be relevant under s. 21. 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 164--Confession-Record-
F 
ing of-Precautions to be taken by Magistrate-Explained. 
The appellant was prosecuted for an offence under s. 302 I.P.C. 
According to the prosecution case, the appellant murdered his wife and 
five children aged 2 to 14 years. After committing the murders, the appel- G 
lant went to the police station with the blood stained sword, and lodged 
the first information report to the effect that 4-5 days earlier he learnt 
about infidelity of his wife and on the night preceding the incident, when 
confronted his wife confessed her illegitimate relationship whereupon he 
got very much disturbed; the following day when his wife was adjusting the 
stones of the wall of the house, he cut her head from the throat and also H 
559 
560 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994) 1 S.C.R. 
A 
killed four of his children playing nearby. When he was about to kill the 
fifth child, his sister-in- law reached there and tried to stop him, but was 
not successful. The police registered the case on the FIR lodged by the 
accused himself. The accused produced the blood stained sword which was 
taken into possession. When the appellant was in judicial custody, his 
B 
confession under s. 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate. 
The investigation culminated in the trial of the accused. 
During the trial, P.W. 11, sister-in-law of the appellant, appeared as 
an eye-witness. According to her testimony, when she was returning from 
the well, she found that the wife of the appellant and his four children had 
C 
been slaughtered and were lying dead and in her presence the appellant 
hit on the neck of his fifth child; she pleaded with the appellant not to kill 
the child but it had no effect on him; the appellant, after committing the 
murders left the place alongwith the sword which was stained with blood; 
then her husband arrived at the place of occurrence after one or one-and-
a-half hour and she narrated the story to him. The appellant however 
D retracted the confession made under s. 164 Cr.P.C. 
The trial court accepted the prosecution case and found the appel-
lant guilty of the offence and sentenced him to death and submitted the 
papers to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence. The appellant 
E 
also filed an appeal before the High Court_ which upheld the conviction, 
confirmed the sentence and dismissed the appeal. Hence the appeal by 
special leave. 
It was contended on behalf of the appellant that in view of provisions 
of s. 25 of the Evidence Act, the first information report could not have 
F 
been taken into consideration by the courts below; P.W. 11 was not a 
reliable or truthful witness because she stood to gain by the conviction of 
the appellant; no credence could be placed on the retracted confessonal 
statement of the appellant recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. since 
necessary precautions had not been taken by the Magistrate before record-
G ing the same; and that if all this evidence was excluded, the appellant was 
entitled to an order of acquittal. Lastly a prayer fo

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.