AIR 1959 PUNJAB 332 ::61 Pun LR 632 ::ILR (1959) Punj 1473

Punjab High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): G. D. Khosla, Tek Chand , JJ

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.133— Accomplice - Accessory after fact - Position of - Corroboration - Circumstantial evidence. It is a rule of caution, which has almost acquired the status of a rule of law, that as the evidence of an accomplice is tainted, it generally requires corroboration. An accomplice means a guilty associate or partner in crime, a person who is believed to have participated in the offence, or in some way or other, is connected with the offence in question. Held that judged from this test, the witness who did not participate or assist in the commission of murder, was not an accomplice. But she appeared to be an accessory after the fact in so tar as she, with a view to shield the accused, had come out with an entirely false story, that she had found the body of the deceased in her deorhi in the morning and she suspected one Suba Singh to be the murderer of the deceased. This was an attempt on her part to put the police on a false track. She was not a privy to the murder, but she aided the accused in escaping. Though not strictly an accomplice in the sense of a particeps criminis, in so far as she was cognisant of the commission of an offence by the accused and did not disclose his name, she was no better. Therefore, the cautionary rules should be applied. Her testimony by itself should not form basis for conviction of th....