It is extremely significant to note that while ruling on a very key point pertaining to the evidentiary value of unsigned confession, the Gauhati High Court has in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Shri Kedukhoyi vs State of Nagaland in Case No. : CRL.A(J)/10/2022 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: GAHC020007972022 that was heard on 22.05.2024 and then finally pronounced on 29.05.2024 has been most unequivocal in ruling that an accused cannot be convicted for a crime solely based on an unsigned confessional statement, without any other evidence to back up the allegations. To put it differently, the Gauhati High Court has made it pretty clear that signing of accused in confessional statement is a prerequisite for being accepted as sole basis for conviction. It must be certainly mentioned here that this most commendable ruling was delivered in a rape and murder case where the only evidence that was available against the accused when the matter reached the High Court was a photocopy of a confession statement. It is quite perplexing to note that this confession statement which became the foundation stone for the conviction was not even signed by the accused (appellant) or the Magistrate who was said to have recorded it which is imperative for a fair trial yet not ensured here and should have been outrightly rejected by the Court at the very first place.
It is thus in the fitness of things that a Division Bench of Gauhati High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi and Hon’ble Mr Justice Budi Habung who authored this brilliant judgment unequivocally held that if the confession statement has not been signed or proved by the Magistrate who recorded it, the same cannot be treated as the true confessional statement by the accused under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). We thus see that the Court deemed it absolutely fit to order the release of the accused man after 21 years of imprisonment. The appellant had been convicted by a trial court for the murder and rape of a woman in 2003.
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice Budi Habung for a Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi and Hon’ble Mr Justice Budi Habung sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 2 that, “This is a jail appeal preferred under section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 01.10.2004 passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Phek, Nagaland in GR No. 27/2003 arising out of Phek PS Case No. 0012/2003 under section 302 & 376 IPC. By the said impugned judgment and order, the accused Shri Kedukhoyi, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for offence under section 302 & 376 of IPC.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench envisages in para 3 that, “The brief facts of the case leading to the preferring of this Jail appeal is that on 18.05.2003, a written request for registration of the case was received by the Officer-in-Charge, PS, Phek from one Novato of Kotisu village, inter-alia stating therein that on 17.05.2003, his wife Smt. Vesazolu (Deceased) went to the field and did not return. On search, her dead body was found 1 km away from the village on 18.05.2003 morning at around 6 am. On finding her dead body it was found that she had been raped and murdered because her dead body was found naked and blood was oozing from her private part and thus, requested for taking necessary action. The case was registered being Phek PS case no. 0012/2003 U/S 302 & 376 IPC and investigated into.”
As it turned out, the Division Bench enunciates in para 4 that, “On completion of the investigation, the IO of the case filed charge sheet against the accused under sections 302 & 376 of IPC.”
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
