LexSUBRAMANIA GOUNDAN versus THE STATE OF MADRAS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
1957 .!vlangoo Singh V, The E'/ection T.-ibunal, Bareil/y aflrl Others S. K. Das J. 1957 Septe1nher 11. 428 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1958] 'demand' in standard English dictionaries and law lexicons. When the context makes the meaning of a word quite clear, it becomes unnecessary to search for and select a particular meaning out of the diverse meanings a word is capable of, according to lexico- graphers. It is sufficient for our purpose to state that even in standard dictionaries and law lexicons, it is well recognised that the word 'demand' may mean simply a 'claim' or 'due' without importing any further meaning of calling upon the person liable to pay the claim or due. For the reasons given above, we hold that not one of the contentions urged on behalf of the appellant is worthy. of acceptance. The election petition was rightly decided, as the appellant was disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Municipal Board in question on the day he filed his nomination, under cl. (g) s. 13-D of the Act. Accordingly, the appeal is dimissed with costs in favour of respondent 3 who alone constested the appeal before us. Appeal dismissed. SUBRAMANIA GOUNDAN v. THE STATE OF MADRAS (B.P. SINHA, GOVINDA MENON and J.L. KAPUR, JJ.) Criminal law-Retracted confession-Corroboration, requirc111e11t of-Question by recording magistrate-If an inducement. The appellant was charged with murder. The. eye witnesses against him were not relied upon. He made a confession before a magistrate. One of the questions put by the magistrate to . the appellant before recording the confession was : ·"For what pur- pose are you going to make a statement ?" To this he replied, "Others will be implicated in the case for murder, I alone have committed murder." It was argued that an inducement was given by the magistrate by the manner in which the question was put. The next day after the murder "a drawer, a baniyan and a bed-sheet'', all stained with human blood were recovered from the appellant, for which no explanation was given by him. The con- fession was retracted before the Court of Session. These recoveries S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 429 were used as corroboration of the confession. It was contended that this. was no corroboration. Held, that the confession was voluntary and the putting by the magistrate of a perfectly innocuous question which was pres- cribed by the Madras Criminal Rules of Practice did not amount to an inducement to make a confesion. Held, further, that there can be no .absolute rule that retract- ed eonfession cannot be acted upon unless it is corroborated materially. But as a matter of prudence and caution, which has sanctified itself into a rule of law, a retracted confession cannot be made solely the basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. It is not necessary that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession regarding the complicity of the accused should be separately and independently corroborated, nor is it essential that the corroboration must come from facts and circumstances discovered after the confession was made. It would be sufficient if the general trend of the confession is substantiated by some evidence which would tally with what is contained in the confes- sion. In the instant case the recovery of clothes stained with human blood for which the appellant gave no explanation was sufficient corroboration of the confession. Balbil' Singh v. State of Punjab, A.LR. (1957) S.C. 216 relied on. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal,No. 127 of 1957. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 12th February, 1957, of the Madras High Court in Criminal AppeJll No. 728 of 1956 and Referred Trial No. 144 of 1956, arising out of the judgment and order date'd the 23rd October, 1956, of the Court of the Addl. Sessions Judge of the Coim- batore Division in S.C. Nos. 120 & 135 of 1956. H.J. Umrigar and T.S. Venkataraman, for the appellant. P. Rama Reddy and T.M. Sen, for the respondent. 1957. September 17. The following judgment of the Court was delivered by 1957 Subramaniri Goundan v. Tlze State a/ MadraJ GOVINDA MENON J .-Before the Additional Judge Govi11da Menon J •. of the court of Sessions of Coimbatore Division there were four accused, of whom the first accused Subra- mania Goundan has now appealed to this court against the confirmation by the High Court of Madras of the conv
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.