Bombay High Court
Reg vs Budhu Nanku And Ors. on 1 January, 1800
Equivalent citations: (1877)ILR 1BOM475
JUDGMENT Westropp, C.J. and Nanabhai Haridas, J.
1. Mahadev Chimnaji Apte for these Appellants contended that the conviction could not be sustained, as they had been identified only by the approvers and fellow-prisoners as having been present at the commission of the crime.
2. Shamrav Vithal for the Crown.
3. The Court, after confirming the convictions and sentences of certain of the appellants, disposed of the appeal of Yesu Dewlata, Rama Ambu, Pandu Ganu, Gangaram Sitaram, Sadu Ramji, Bapu Gopala, and Govind Ganu as follows:
4. As regards the others, the Court quashes the convictions and sentences on the ground that the approvers Shripatrav and Rama are not corroborated as to the identity of these latter prisoners. The confessions of co-prisoners implicating them cannot, in our opinion, be accepted as evidence to corroborate the testimony of these approvers: See 3 Russell on Crimes, 4th edition, by Greaves, pages 603, 604, and 605, Reg. v. Malapa (11 Bom. H.C. Rep. 196), and Reg. v. Chatur Purshotam, decided on the 7th January 1876 by West and Nanabhai Haridas, JJ.