JUDGMENT : Barman, J. - The accused Appellant Rajib Domb of village Petroput was convicted on a charge of murder of Sonu Porja and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life. 2. On August 11, 1961 in the morning the Officer-in charge of Jeypore police Station received some information from the Assistant Engineer of Dandakaranya Project that a man was found dead on the right side of the road in the vicinity of a thick jungle. The road crosses the Kolab river near mile stone No. 124/3 where there is a bridge. The Investigating Officer went to the spot and found patch of blood near mile stone No. 124/1 on the Vizag-Jeypore road. He also found a stick, an umbrella, a rag and a bid necklace lying scattered round about. There was a trail of blood from that place to the place on the left side of the road about 60 feet beyond mile stone No. 124/2 where also there was another big patch of blood. The dead body that was found on the road side had a cut injury on the left side of the neck. The police held inquest, made different seizures and the dead body was sent to Jeypore hospital for postmortem examination. 3. There was no eye-witness to the incident. It is however clear that the deceased had died with a cut wound on his neck which was sufficient to kill him instantaneously. 'The doctor's opinion is that the victim was hacked to death by means of a Tangia. The deceased?s brother, Guru Parja (P.W. 9) identified the dead body and also the Khanja Nolis (ear rings) belonging to the deceased before the Tahasildar. The Investigating Officer had also taken a clear photograph of the deceased which is marked as exhibit 16/2. On August 11, 1961 the accused was traced, arrested' and kept in custody by the police. He was produced before the Magistrate on August 13, 1961, The accused made confession? before the Magistrate on August 14, 1961. 4. The prosecution mainly relies on retracted confession of the accused and certain recoveries including the Tangia and the Khanja Nollis (ear rings) which, it is said, directly connect the accused with the crime. That apart there is evidence that the accused and the deceased were seen together. There is no apparent motive for the murder. The defence is general denial of charges against the accused. That apart there is evidence that the accused and the deceased were seen together. There is no apparent motive for the murder. The defence is general denial of charges against the accused. It is alleged that the case has been foisted against the accused out of enmity and the alleged identification of the ear-rings purporting to connect the accused with the crime was not properly done. 5. In this appeal it was contended on behalf of the accused Appellant that the confession was neither voluntary nor true. The learned defence counsel made comments on other Investigating Officer (P.W. 12). The Investigating Officer said that at 6.30 p.m. on August 11, 1961 he traced the accused, tackled him and arrested him. He also said that he further tackled the accused on the following day (August 12, 1961) when the accused confessed to have kept the axe in a corner of his father?s house and led the officer to the accused's father's house. The accused pointed out the axe in a corner of his father?s house. The officer seized the axe which bore blood stains. The Investigating Officer?s evidence further is that he had further tackled the accused on the same night but could not get further clue. But on his having tackled him next morning i.e. on August 13, 1961 the accused confessed to have kept a Noli (ear-ring) concealed near a river and led him to a place near village burial ground, four furlongs away from Petropur village and brought out a Noli M.O. VIII from under a piece of small stone near a big stone. The Investigating Officer seized the same with the small stone. There were two seizure witnesses who accompanied the Investigating Officer on the occasion. The learned defence counsel commented that the confession could- not be voluntary as the confession was made as a result of the Investigating Officer having "tackled" the accused. The dictionary meaning of the word "tackle" is to grapple with, grasp with endeavour to hold of manage or overcome (opponent, awkward thing or business problem); to begin to deal in earnest with. When a police officer deals with a criminal he so does as by way of tackling a problem. It cannot be said that the word 'tackle' in any way suggests that any undue pressure was exerted so as to render the confession involuntary. 6. When a police officer deals with a criminal he so does as by way of tackling a problem. It cannot be said that the word 'tackle' in any way suggests that any undue pressure was exerted so as to render the confession involuntary. 6. It is also the defence comment that the confession is not true. As regards the spot where the victim died, it is said in the confessional statement that the deceased, after being hit by the accused with the Tangia, went a furlong and then died whereas the doctor (P.W. 11) said that the injured must have died on the spot without being able to move sufficiently away but could only move a few paces, if the man was on the move at the time of death due to inertia. There is finally no inconsistency in this. From the spot map it is dear that after having been hit by the accused, the deceased was able to run a distance. The deceased suffered from shock and haemorrage. He could only run some paces and while running he fen down. This explains 1 the patches of blood at several places which the Investigating Officer found on the road beyond the mile stone. 7. The confession requires general corroboration. We are satisfied on evidence that in the present case there was general corroboration of the confession. There is evidence to show that the accused and the deceased were seen together P.W. 4. The witness said that he had seen the deceased going towards Baiparipada side with the accused while returning from Kotagam at about 7 a.m. The witness saw them over the bridge; the accused was holding a Tangia. The recovery of the Tangia (M.O. VII) in the circumstances stated by the Investigating Officer is a further corroboration of the confessional statement. P.W. 5 is one of the seizure witnesses to the recovery of the Tangia. The accused refers to the recovery of the Tangia in his confessional statement. The witness (P.W. 5) said that the accused?s house was searched and a blood stained axe was discovered from a corner of the house. The evidence of the doctor (P.W. II) was that the injury was ante-mortem and could be caused by 1), Tangia (M.O. VII) if given with a forcible thrust. This also is another piece of evidence of general corroboration of the confessional statement. The evidence of the doctor (P.W. II) was that the injury was ante-mortem and could be caused by 1), Tangia (M.O. VII) if given with a forcible thrust. This also is another piece of evidence of general corroboration of the confessional statement. The doctor?s further evidence-that the injured could move only about a few paces if he was on the move at the time of death-also supports the confessional statement that, after being hit with the Tangia by the accused, the deceased had moved a furlong. Moreover, the recovery of the dead body from the road side in the circumstances hereinbefore stated is by itself further corroboration generally of the confessional statement. 8. The recovery of the Khanja Noli (ear-rings) (M.O. VII) is an independent piece of evidence implicating the accused in the crime. The seizure witness (P.W. 5) said that the accused had kept the other Noli and offered to show the place; the accused led the police officer to a place 6 or 7 furlongs from the place where the dead body was found towards village Petropur wherefrom under big stone he brought out a Noli placed under a small stone. It was seized. The Tahasildar conducted the T.I. Parade for identification of the Noli. The article were mixed up with other Nolis of similar type. The witnesses to the Test Identification were P.W. 9 and P.W. 13 the goldsmith who both identified the Nolis. P.W. 9 also said that he identified the Khanja Nolis before the Tahasildar. When the pair of Nolis was produced in Court in course of hearing they looked alike, the little difference in fine ornamentation could not be noticed unless one?s attention was directly pointed out to the same. 9. Thus apart from the confessional statement which was voluntary and true, there is abundant circumstantial evidence sufficient for conviction of the accused. Indeed the circumstantial evidence in this case is only consistent with the guilt of the accused. The circumstances fully established against the accused are that on the date of the occurrence the accused and the deceased were seen together by witnesses; that the two Nolis of the deceased were discovered at the instance of the accused, as the seizure witness P.W. 5 fully stated in his evidence. 10. In this view of the case the order of conviction and sentences passed by the learned Sessions Judge must be upheld. 11. 10. In this view of the case the order of conviction and sentences passed by the learned Sessions Judge must be upheld. 11. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. Misra, J. 12. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed