ISSUE:
Whether the testimony of a witness regarding incriminating circumstances is credible if the witness remained silent for over two months without cogent reason?
Whether the confession contained in the letter allegedly sent by the accused to the Deputy Commissioner is reliable evidence?
Whether a letter narrating the accused's extrajudicial confession, sent to police during investigation, is admissible under Section 162 Cr.P.C.?
Whether the oral extrajudicial confession made by the accused can be relied upon for conviction?
RULE:
A witness who claims to have knowledge of a gravely incriminating circumstance against an accused but remains silent for an extended period without a valid reason significantly diminishes the credibility of their testimony. Prolonged unexplained inaction makes such testimony unreliable and unsafe for conviction, particularly in cases involving serious offenses like murder.
A written confession allegedly made by the accused, if found to contain inconsistencies or is surrounded by suspicious circumstances, cannot be safely relied upon. If the handling of the confession lacks procedural integrity, has potential for manipulation, or does not align with the overall context of the communication, it is unsafe to act upon it for proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.