Balwant Kaur v. Union Territory Of Chandigarh AIR 1988 SC 139
ISSUE:
Whether an accomplice’s testimony requires corroboration for conviction?
RULE:
An accomplice’s testimony can be the sole basis for conviction, but corroboration is needed to confirm its credibility and link the accused to the crime.
FACTS:
A married woman and two others were charged with conspiracy and murder.
The prosecution alleged the woman had an affair with one of the co-accused and conspired to kill her husband.
On 13th November, they killed her husband and hid the body.
A co-accused turned approver and testified about the extramarital affair and the conspiracy to murder.
Based on this testimony, the trial court convicted the accused, which was upheld by the High Court, leading to the appeal.
HELD:
Supreme Court found that the accomplice’s testimony lacked corroboration regarding the appellant’s involvement.
The court found that there was no evidence of contact between the accused after the murder.
Key incriminating details were not put to the appellant under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, denying her a chance to explain.
The lack of corroboration on critical points led to the appellant’s benefit of doubt and her conviction was set aside. She was released.