R. KUPPUSAMY v. STATE

In the instant appeal, the conviction of the appellant was challenged on grounds 1) that making of the confessional statement was, facts and H 138 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 4 S.C.R. A circumstances of the case, not only improbable but wholly unsupported and uncorroborated by any independent evidence; and 2) that extra judicial confession by its ve:ry nature is a wea'k type of evidence which ought to be corroborated by independent evidence B in order to support a conviction of the maker of the confession, and no such corroboration was forthcoming in the instant case. Dismissing the appeal, the Court C HELD: 1. An extra judicial confession is capable of sustaining a conviction provided the same is not made under any inducement, is-voluntary and truthful. Whether or not these attributes of an extra judicial confession are satisfied in a given case will, however, depend upon the D facts and circumstances of each case. It is eventually the satisfaction of the Court as to the reliability of the confession, keeping in view the circumstances in which the same is made, the person to whom it is alleged to have been made and the corroboration, if any, available E as to the truth of such a confession that will determine whether the extra judicial confession ought to be made a basis for holding the accused guilty. [Para 7] [145-C-E]