SHESHANNA BHUMANNA YADAV versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [1971] 1 S.C.R. 617 · Decided: 08-05-1970 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

B 
c 
.D 
F 
G 
H 
SHESHANNA BHUMANNA YADAV 
V. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
May 8, 1970 
[A. N. RAY AND I. D. DUA, JJ.] 
617 
Indian Evidence Act (I of 1872). ss. 133, 114, ill. (b)-Evidence of 
accomplice and corroboration-Scope of. 
Two accused father and son were convicted of the offence of murder· 
ing a young boy of 15 and the offences of house-breaking and theft next 
day, of articles from the house of the grand-father of the deceased in 
which the 
deceased was living alone at the time of his murder. 
'Dhe 
evidence mainly consisted of that of the apprO\·er, 
fhe corroboration 
of the approver's evidence as against one of the accused (the son) con· 
sisled of the following :-(i) on the day of the occurrence, two wit· 
nesses saw the accused the approver and another (a young boy of 15) 
wearing khakishorts and a white shirt; (2) a few days later another wit· 
ness saw a dead body at the scene of the crime-a field, with khaki shorts 
and a white shirt; (3) the grand-father discovered the theft and the 
disappearance of his grandson when he returned to the house a week 
alter the occurrence; ( 4) the approver, on the date of his arrest pointed 
out to the police the scene of the crime where, among other things 
a 
shirt, a chain! and some bones were 
found-the shirt and chain were 
identified to be those of the deceased-and according io the medical 
evidence the bones were those of a human being, possibly male; (5) the 
accused, after his arrest, produced to the police, a pieee of cloth stolen 
from the house; (6) the evidence of pledge of a cycle and sale of a 
cycle carrier belonging to the granO-father of the deceased: (7) sale 
of some utensils belonging to the grand-father of the deceased, by the 
accused. after scrapping off the name; and (8) the finding of a cloth 
belongi•lg to the grandfather of the deceased in a tailor's shop. which the 
accused hastened to take away, when he learnt that the grand-father was 
questioning the tailor about the cloth. 
As regards the other accused (the father) the corroborating evidence 
consisted of the following :- (1) there were civil and criminal pro· 
ceedings between him and the grand'father of the deceased O\'er the pos· 
session of the house : ( 2) he gave and sold several, articles and pieces of 
silver to a witness who was traced by the police as a result of the s.tate-
ment of the accused (sen). 
The articles were produced before police. 
and all of them except one lump of silver, were identified by the grand-
father of the deceased as his articles; (3) it was this accused who gave 
the piece of cloth to the approver who ~ave it to the, tailor and which 
was hastily taken away by his son; and (4) he joined hi, son in the sale 
of cycle carrier. 
On the question 
whether the corroboration 
was sufficient in 
law. 
HELD: In Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab, [1957] S.C.R, 953 and 
in Lachi Ram v. State of Punjab, [1967] I S.C.R. 243, it was held that the 
court should, be &atisfied : (!) that the apryrover or accomplice was a 
reliable witness; (2) there must be reliable corroboration of the appro,-er's 
evidence; and (3) there must be sufficient corroborative evidence 
in 
material particulars to connect the accused with the crime. The nature of 
618 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1971] l S.C.R. 
co~roboration is that it is confirmatory eviden_ce and may consist -of_ the 
A 
evidence of another 
witness_ or of circumstances. like conduct of the 
accused. 
When it is said that corroborative evidence must implicate the 
accus_ed in material particulars it means that it is not enough that a piece 
of evidence tends to confirm the truth of a part of the testimony to be 
corroboratecl. It must confirm that part of the testimony which suggests 
that the crime was committed by the accused. [622 E-F; 625 A-BJ 
In the present case, apart from the relationship between the two 
11-
accused, there was also close association in the disposal of the ~rticles. 
The close proximity of time between the murder and theft points to the 
inescapable conclusion that they formed part of the same transaction. 
Since the transaction was one composite unit of murdering and committing 
theft, and it was found that the approver was a reliable witness, all the 
pieces of evidence afforded 
sufficient corroboration 
of 
the approver's 
evidence in material particulars ancl proved that the accused were guilty" 
C" 
of the offences with which they were charged. [624 C-D; 625 D, El 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDI

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