J. N. MORE, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT Naresh Kumar Sharma and three others were convicted by a learned Additional Session Judge. 24-Parganas under sections 302/34, Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Subhala Das, a taxi driver, in furtherance of their common intention on 29th June, 1979 at Gopalpur within P. S. Airport and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The appellant was also convicted along with others under sections 394/34, Indian Penal Code for committing robbery in respect of taxi No. WST 2706 and the property of the deceased at Shekharpur within P. S. Rajarhat in furtherance of the common intention of them all and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. The appellant seeks to assail the said order of conviction and sentence in this appeal. ( 2 ) SHORN of unnecessary details, the prosecution case is as under:taxi No. WBT 2706 is owned by P. W. 7 Smt. Ruby Bose on whose behalf husband Ranjit Bose (P. W. 5) used to look after the taxi business. Subhalal deceased was the driver of the taxi at the relevant time. The taxi used to be kept in a garage at 12/b, Cames street within P. S. Park Street. The driver used to take out the taxi from the garage in the morning by signing in the Garage Register and return the taxi to the garage at the end of the day. In course of this usual practice, the driver took out the taxi from the garage on the morning of 29. 6. 79 and at that time P. W. 5 Ranjit Bose was with the driver. Four, persons boarded the taxi near the Ujjala Cinema. P. W. 5 went in the taxi upto Hasra Road. Thereafter, the driver drove away the taxi with the four passengers. On that night the driver did not return to the garage with the taxi. On the following morning P. W. 5 Ranjit Bose came to the garage but could not find the taxi or the driver there.- He lodged a missing information at Park Street Police Station. On 29. 6. 79 at about 8. 30 p. m. accused Basudeb and 3 others including appellant Naresh were seen going to Shekharpur in the said taxi No. WBT 2706. Two of the companions of Basudeb including the appellant left Shekharpur while Basudeb and Asit remained at Shekharpur with the taxi. On 29. 6. 79 at about 8. 30 p. m. accused Basudeb and 3 others including appellant Naresh were seen going to Shekharpur in the said taxi No. WBT 2706. Two of the companions of Basudeb including the appellant left Shekharpur while Basudeb and Asit remained at Shekharpur with the taxi. Basudeb was found changing the number of the taxi by altering the first digit in the rear number plate. The first digit was found to have been altered to 8 in place of 2. P. W. 10 Sagar Roy, a resident of village Shekharpur found Basudeb changing the number of the rear number plate of the taxi. Out of suspicion he reported the matter to the village resistance party and P. W. 21 constable Haripada Sur and another constable of Rajarhat Police Station who had come to the village on night patrol duty. The two constables then challenged accused Basudeb and Asit who could not offer satisfactory explanation for their possession of the taxi with the number in the rear number plate altered. The constables then took these two accused persons along with the taxi to Rajarhat Police Station. An attached case with wearing apparel two tin containers with black and white paint, one brush and a signed photograph of Basudeb and some papers relating to the taxi were recovered from the taxi. In the mean time, on the morning of 30. 6. 79 P. W. 20 Arun. Baidya found the driving licence of the deceased lying on the road and he deposited the same at Rajarhat Police Station. P. W. 4 found the dead body of the deceased by the side of the railway line and informed the Airport Police Station over telephone about the discovery of the dead body. On receipt of the telephonic message P. W. 30 S. I. Ranjit Narayan Majunder went to Gopalpur with force and found a dead body lying in a bush of Kalmi plant to the north of the old railway line with a napkin tied round the neck. One Biswanath Mandal, since deceased, made over a written complaint to him, which was forwarded to tie police station for starting a case. On the basis of the written complaint the f formal First Information Report was drawn up at Airport Police Station and a case under section 302, Indian Penal Code was started against unknown persons. One Biswanath Mandal, since deceased, made over a written complaint to him, which was forwarded to tie police station for starting a case. On the basis of the written complaint the f formal First Information Report was drawn up at Airport Police Station and a case under section 302, Indian Penal Code was started against unknown persons. P. W. 30 took up investigation. On receipt of a telephonic message from the Rajarhat Police Station, P. W. 30 went to Rajarhat Police Station, and seized the taxi in question and other articles and took accused Basudeb and Asit into custody. Thereafter, P. W. 5 Ranjit Bose was contacted and he went to Barrackpur morgue where the dead body had been sent and identified the dead body as that of deceased driver Subhalal Das. The two other accused persons Mannan Sardar and Naresh Sharma were subsequently arrested by the police. Mannan Sardar and Naresh Sharma made confessional statements to the Magistrate at Barrackpur which were recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. ( 3 ) AFTER completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons under sections 302/34, Indian Penal Code and Sections 394/34. Indian Penal Code, which in usual course ended in committal of the case to the Court of Session. ( 4 ) THE defence is a plea of innocence. The confessional statement of the accused appellant Naresh Sharma recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. was not retracted. ( 5 ) THE murder of Subhalal deceased is not disputed before us and is amply proved by the medical evidence. P. W. 14 Dr. KP. Saha, M. O. , Barrackpur Police Case Hospital who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased found the following injuries: (i) Fracture ribs_sth to 7th on left side. (ii) 2 abrasions 1 x and 11/2 x 1 over front of right knee joint. (iii) Fracture of hyoid bone at the right greater curve. P. W. 14 Dr. KP. Saha, M. O. , Barrackpur Police Case Hospital who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased found the following injuries: (i) Fracture ribs_sth to 7th on left side. (ii) 2 abrasions 1 x and 11/2 x 1 over front of right knee joint. (iii) Fracture of hyoid bone at the right greater curve. (iv) One ligature mark-horizontal, continuous and lying low down in the back It starts with an impression of knots (4 knots) over the right side of front of neck at a site in above the upper border of thyroid cartilage and 1/2 to the right of midline and passes horizontally to the right to a point below right mandibular angle whence it passes backwards to a point 2 below right mastoid process and thence it turns backwards and medially over the back of neck and cross midline at a point 2 below external occipital protuberance then passes horizontally to the left and next curves forwards and passes through a point 1 below left mastoid tip and reaches a point itt below left mandibular angle. Thence it curves medially and over front of neck lies with its lower margin lying along upper border of thyroid cartilage and then it ends at the starting point without leaving any gap. Total length of ligature mark is 141/2. The ligature material was a gamcha tied round the neck with consecutive 4 knots as described and in this state the body reached the morgue. On dissection he found fracture of hyoid bone as stated laceration of left pleura and laceration of left lung. Death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to strangulation ante mortem and homicidal in nature. There is, therefore, no doubt that this is a case of grue-some murder. ( 6 ) THE next question-and the crucial one for our consideration is whether accused appellant Naresh Sharma was responsible for the death of the deceased? ( 7 ) THE prosecution came mainly rests on the judicial confession of the accused appellant recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. The confessional statement is Ext. 14. The material part of it, translated into English, is as fellows: My name is Naresh Kumar Sharma. I am aged 20 years. I am Sindhi-Punjabi. I live with my father in Calcutta. P. C. The confessional statement is Ext. 14. The material part of it, translated into English, is as fellows: My name is Naresh Kumar Sharma. I am aged 20 years. I am Sindhi-Punjabi. I live with my father in Calcutta. My father is manager of D J. Brick Field at Garia I know accused Mapnan Sardar very well as my neighbour. He is a rickshaw-puller. I came to know another accused Basu Chakraborty long before as he previously lived near our house. Thereafter he left the place. I met him on the date of occurrence. On Friday last (29. 6. 79) at about 9. 00 a. m. Mannan and I were sitting near the Garia Rickshaw Stand when Basu and him friend Asit came to us. I picked up acquaintance with Asit on that day. Mannan and I agreed to their proposal for an outing. We went near Baaba Jatin. Colony on foot. Basu purchased, one tin of black paint and one tin of white paint and a brush from a paint shop. Thereafter, we went to Kalighat partly by bus and partly on foot. At that place Basu and his friend called a taxi and said to us let us have a trip to the Airport area and back. Thereafter we four boarded that taxi and went mar the Airport. At that place we along with the driver took tea and smoked cigarettes in a tea-stall. Thereafter, we again boarded the taxi and proceeded along the pucca road. We stopped the taxi near a Kuchha road. Mannan. Basudeb and myself got own from the taxi and Ash and the driver only remained in the taxi. Thereafter, Asit also got down, and thereafter there were some discussions among them. Then we again boarded the taxi and while the taxi was proceeding, suddenly Babu asked, the driver to stop the taxi and as soon as the driver stopped the taxi, Asit pressed the mouth of the taxi- driver with a handkerchief of Mannan and Babu gave first blows on the face and abdomen of the driver. Asit also assaulted the driver. Thereafter the driver was brought from the front seat to the rear seat and a handkerchief was inserted inside his mouth. Asit also assaulted the driver. Thereafter the driver was brought from the front seat to the rear seat and a handkerchief was inserted inside his mouth. The napkin of the driver was tied around the neck of the driver and Alit, Basu and I put pressure with the napkin and in the process the driver died. It was then 2/2. 25 pm. Thereafter, Basu covered the body of the driver with a red lungi and we concealed the dead body covering it with our legs. Basn drove the taxi with a great speed. At the time of the murder of the driver Asit took away Rs. 46/ -. driving licence and other papers relating to the taxi from the pocket of the driver. While driving fast, Basu knocked down an old Mahomedan and speed away after giving Rs. 20/- to him. Thereafter, he drove the taxi from one place to another. At about 6. 00 to 6. 30 p. m. the taxi was stopped at a lonely place. Thereafter Basu and Asit dragged the dead body of the driver and left it in a field. It was then raining heavily and the road was lonely. Thereafter, Basu took the taxi near a school. He had some friends there. At that place, Basu gave Rs. 20/to two of us and asked us to go home. Accordingly, we returned home at 12. 00 mid-night. This is my statement. I cannot read Bengali but I can speak and understand Bengali well. ( 8 ) A confession, if voluntarily and truthfully made, is an efficacious proof of guilt. As held by the Supreme Court in Shankaria v. State of Rajasthan1 when in a capital case, the prosecution demands conviction of the accused primarily, on the basis of his confession recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. the court must apply a double test: (i) Whether the confession was perfectly voluntary? (ii) If so, whether it is true and trust worthy? Satisfaction of the first test is a sine qua non for its admissibility in evidence. If the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise such as mentioned in section 24 of the Evidence Act, it must be excluded and rejected brevi manu. In such a case, the question of proceeding further to apply the second test does not arise. If the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise such as mentioned in section 24 of the Evidence Act, it must be excluded and rejected brevi manu. In such a case, the question of proceeding further to apply the second test does not arise. If the first test is satisfied, the court must, before acting upon the confession, reach the finding that what. has been stated therein is true and reliable. For judging the reliability of such a confession or for that matter of any substantive pieco of evidence, there is no rigid cannon of universal application. Even so, one broad method which may be useful in most cases for evaluating a confession may be indicated. The court should carefully examine the confession and compare it with the rest of the evidence in the light of the surrounding circumstances and probabilities of the case. If on such examination and comparison, the confession appears to be a probable catalogue of events and naturally fits in with the rest of the evidence and surrounding circumstances, it may be taken to have satisfied the second test. ( 9 ) LET us first see whether the confession recorded under section 164 Cr. P. C. is absolutely free and voluntary. After arrest the appellant was produced before the Magistrate on 2. 7. 79. Prom the record of the Magistrate court, it appears that the appellant wanted make a confession and he was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class for the purpose of recording his confession on 2. 7. 79. The Learned Judicial Magistrate gave him adequate caution and sent him to jail custody for reflection and directed the Superintendent of the Jail to keep him in segregation and produce him on the following day. On 3. 7. 79 the Magistrate cautioned him again by putting questions which he recorded in the confessional statement (Ext. 14) and being satisfied that he wanted to make confession voluntarily he recorded his confession. The Magistrate recorded thet certificate that after giving time for reflection and after giving due caution and after being satisfied that the confession was voluntary he recorded it. The confession was not retracted at any point of time. In his examination under section 313 Cr. P. C. the accused-appellant has stated that he has nothing to say about the confessional statement which be made before the Magistrate. The confession was not retracted at any point of time. In his examination under section 313 Cr. P. C. the accused-appellant has stated that he has nothing to say about the confessional statement which be made before the Magistrate. He has not complained of any threat, inducement or promise Mr. Bhattacherjee appearing on behalf of the accused- appellant has not also challenged the voluntary nature of the confession. We are fully satisfied that the judicial confession of the appellant is absolutely free and voluntary. ( 10 ) LET us next consider whether the said confession may be accepted as true and reliable. The confessional statement (Ext. 14) contains an elaborate account of the occurrence. Prima facie there is nothing improbable or unbelievable in it. It appears to be a spontaneous account, studded with such vivid details about the manner of the commission of the crime in question, which only the perpetrator of the come could know. The confession also receives assurance in several material particulars from reliable independent evidence, mainly of circumstantial character, as we shall presently see. P. W. 7 Smt. Ruby Bose is the owner of the taxi No. WBT 2706. P. W. 5 Ranjit Bose is her husband who looks after the taxi business. His evidence shows that Subhalal Das (the deceased) was the driver of the taxi at the material time. The taxi used to be kept at 12 B Camac Street. On 29 6. 79 the deceased took out the taxi from the garage in his presence. Four passengers boarded the taxi near Ujjala Cinema at Kalighat. P. W. 5 came in. the taxi up to Hazra Road and got down there. The deceased did not return to the garage with the taxi on that night. On the following morning. P. W. 5 went to the garage but could not find the taxi or the driver there. He lodged a missing information at Park Street Police Station. The evidence of P. W. 5 that four passengers boarded the taxi at Kalighat fits in with the confessional statement of the appellant that the four accused persons boarded the taxi at Kalighat. P. W. 9 Sachin Roy, a resident of Shekharpur, saw Basubeb and his friends coming to Shekharpur in a taxi bearing registration No. 2706 on 29. 6. 79 between 7. 30 and 8. P. W. 9 Sachin Roy, a resident of Shekharpur, saw Basubeb and his friends coming to Shekharpur in a taxi bearing registration No. 2706 on 29. 6. 79 between 7. 30 and 8. 00 p. m. According to the witness the taxi was kept inside a shed of Jatin Roy and his friends were staying in a nearby school. He identified the appellant Naresh Sharma as one of the companions of Basudeb whom he saw in the school. There was no cross-examination of this witness on behalf of the appellant. P. W. 10 Sagar Roy, another resident of Shekharpur, also saw Basudeb and 3 others going to Shekharpur by a taxi on 29. 6. 79 between 8. 00 and 8. 30 p. m. Two of them left Shekharpur on that night. Basudeb and another remained in a school. At 10. 30 or 11. 00 p. m. the witness saw Basudeb changing the number in the rear number plate of the taxi from 2706 to 8706. According to the witness the taxi was kept in a shed of Jatin Roy. Suspecting foul play the witness informed the members of R. O. party and P. W. 1 constable Haripada sur and another constable who were on night patrol duty in village Shekharpur. On receipt of the information P. W. 21 and others went to an open shed and found there a taxi bearing No. WBT 2706 at the front and WBT 8706 at the rear. Accused Basudeb and Asit were found in the taxi. Being challenged they could not produce any document or give any satisfactory explanation. P. W. 21, and another constable then took Basudeb and Asit with the taxi to Rajarhat Police Station. P. W. 29 S. I. Ramtndra Chakraborty took Basudeb and Asit into custody and seized the taxi along with two tin containers with liquid black and white paint and an attached case with papers, brush etc. under a seizure list (Ext. 5/2 ). P. W. 8 Tapan Chaudhury, a seizure list witness, proves the seizure which has not been challenged in the cross-examination. P. W. 20 Arun Kumar Baidya found the driving licence of the deceased on the road and deposited the same at the Police Station and P. W. 29 seized it under a seizure list (Ext. 7/1) Material Ext. V is the driving licence. P. W. 20 Arun Kumar Baidya found the driving licence of the deceased on the road and deposited the same at the Police Station and P. W. 29 seized it under a seizure list (Ext. 7/1) Material Ext. V is the driving licence. P W. 20, a seizure list witness proves the seizure which has not been challenged. P. W. 28, S I. B. R. Gupta, the then Officer-in-Charge of Airport Police Station, seized the taxi with a driving licence, passport size photograph of the deceased, two tin containers of black and white paint and papers relating to the taxi at the Rajarhat Police Station under the seizure list (Ext. 6/2 ). P. W. 15 Abdul Kasem, a seizure list witness proves the seizure which has not been challenged by the defence. The brush and the containers of black and white paint are Mat. Ext. VIII collectively. The seizure of one tin of white paint and one tin of black paint and a brush corroborates the confessional statement of the appellant that Basudeb purchased one tin of black paint and one tin of white paint and a brush from a paint shop. The seizure of the driving licence and other papers relating to the taxi also fits in with the confessional statement of the appellant that driving licence and other papers relating to the taxi were taken. away from the pocket of the driver. The evidence of P. Ws. 9 and 10 also corroborates the confessional statement of the appellant that Basudeb drove the taxi near a school and the appellant and accused Mannan left for home leaving Basudeb and Asit at that place. The dead body of the deceased was discovered by P. W. 4 Madan Ghosh on 30. 6. 79 at Gopalpur by the side of the old railway line. On receipt of a telephonic message from P. W. 4, P. W. 30 S. I. R. N. Majumder, attached to Airport Police Station, went to Gopalpur and found the dead body of the deceased lying in a bush of Kalmi plants to the north of the old railway line with a napkin tied round the neck. P. W. 30 held inquest on the dead body and sent It to Barrackpur morgue for postmortem examination. P. W. 5 identified the dead body as that of his driver Subhalal Das. P. W. 30 held inquest on the dead body and sent It to Barrackpur morgue for postmortem examination. P. W. 5 identified the dead body as that of his driver Subhalal Das. The discovery of the dead body of the deceased from that place tallies with the account in the confessional statement of the appellant that the dead body of the driver was left in a field by the side of the road. The evidence of P. W. 14 Dr. K. P. Saba shows that a Gamcha (napkin) was tied round the neck of the deceased with consecutive 4 knots. Death according to the doctor was due to strangulation and the ligature material was the said Gamcha (napkin ). The medical evidence clearly supports the confessional statement regarding the manner of causing death. ( 11 ) AFTER carefully examining the confession of the appellant and comparing it with the rest of the evidence in the light of the surrounding circumstances and probabilities of the case, we are of the opinion that the confession is a probable catalogue of events which fits in with the rest of the evidence and surrounding circumstances and receives assurance in several material particulars from independent evidence. We have, therefore no hesitation in accepting the confession of the appellant as true and reliable. It appears from the confession of the appellant that he actively participated in strangulation of the deceased with the help of a napkin along with other accused persons. He along with his associates also tried to conceal the dead body of the deceased in the rear seat of the taxi covering in with this legs. His conduct shows that he also shared the common intention with other accused persons to kill the deceased. The common intention developed on the spot. He was, therefore, rightly convicted by the court below under section 302/34 Indian Penal Code. The evidence also clearly shows that the appellant along with others committed robbery of the taxi and papers relating to the taxi. The appellant was, therefore, rightly convicted under sections 394/34, Indian Penal Code. For the foregoing reasons, we dismiss the appeal and affirm the order of conviction and sentence. Appeal dismissed. .