Trace Your Case

BALWANT KAUR V. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH

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.