S. Haque, J — Nayeb Ali was missing from 28.8.82 and his brother Has mat AH Khan informed police. The dead body was recovered from a ditch in the compound of Hastnat AH Khan on 31.8.82. Post mortem examination was being held by Dr. K.Duarah and found one cut wound, bone deep in front of the chest just below the left clavicle, one haematuma over the manubrium starvain with fracture and another cut wound on the right side of the abdomen causing injury into the abdominal cavity through which intestine came out and thoraxie was full of blood with laceration to the left lung. The doctor opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from the injuries. The trial Court accepted the opinion of the doctor. We fully endorse the view taken by the trial Court in view of the wound in the abdomen which cut the lung. Thus, there was no dispute on the fact of death of Nayeb Ali as a result of injuries sustained. 2. Hasmat Ali Khan was held guilty under section 302/201, IPC in the trial held by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Sessions Case No. 48 (B) of 1985 on 31.1.87. 3. The prosecution case is based on two types of evidence, firstly, confessional statement of Hasmat Ali Khan and secondly circumstantial evidence. As regards the circumstantial evidence the following facts require consideration. Hasmat Ali and his brother Nayeb Ali had land dispute. Hasmat Ali informed police about the missing of his brother Nayeb Ali on 28.8.82 and he asked the villagers PWs 4, 5 and 6 to search his brother Nayeb Ali in the ditch of his own compound. The dead body was found in the ditch under water hyacinth of his compound. These facts lead us to know that Hasmat knew that dead body of Nayeb Ali was in that ditch covered by water hyacinth. 4. Police registered UD Case No. 38/82 on the discovery of the dead body on 31.8.82. Thereafter on enquiry the Sub Inspec­tor of Police Nazaroul Haque l.askar lodged First Information Report on 1.9.82 implicating Hasmat Ali Khan as assailant of his brother Nayeb AH. 4. Police registered UD Case No. 38/82 on the discovery of the dead body on 31.8.82. Thereafter on enquiry the Sub Inspec­tor of Police Nazaroul Haque l.askar lodged First Information Report on 1.9.82 implicating Hasmat Ali Khan as assailant of his brother Nayeb AH. The deposition of PWs 4, 5 and 6 along with the missing report given by Hasmat Ali himself on 28.8.82 and the fact of discovery of the dead body on 31.8.8 from a ditch make out a case that Hasmat Ali had knowledge of death of Nayeb Ali. Either he did it or had seen somebody doing it. His conducts go against his innocence. 5. Hasmat Ali was produced on 9.1. 82 before the Magistrate Shri S.C.Sarma (PW 12) to record the confession. The Magistrate duly cautioned him in accordance with the requirement of section 164 Cr.P.C. and remanded him to judicial custody. He was again produced on 2.9.82 at about 10.30 A.M. and the Magistrate again cautioned him in accordance with the requirement of section 164 Cr.P.C. and gave him time for reflection till 4 P.M. Thereafter the Magistrate again questioned him to ascertain if he was ready to make confession voluntarily and when the Magistrate became sati­sfied that he was ready to make confession voluntarily, then the Magistrate recorded his confession. The Magistrate duly certified that the confession was free from outside influence, true and voluntary. Hasmat Ali in his confessional statement said that on Saturday at 11 PM his brother came to his compound and caused annoyance, whereupon he stabbed him at the abdomen with a dagger and thereafter with the help of his son Ajij Khan buried the dead body under water hyacinth. 6. The confessional statement had fully corroborated with the circumstantial evidence referred to above. We are fully satisfied that the Magistrate had observed the formalities under the provision of section 164, Cr.P.C. and we hold that the confession was true and voluntary. 7. The conviction can be based on a true and voluntary confession. In the instant case besides the confession being true and voluntary, it had been corroborated by strong circumstantial evidence. The prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that Hasmat All intentionally caused the death of his brother Nayeb AH and concealed the dead body in order to disappear evidence of murder. The trial Court had rightly held him guilty U/s 302/201, IPC. The prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that Hasmat All intentionally caused the death of his brother Nayeb AH and concealed the dead body in order to disappear evidence of murder. The trial Court had rightly held him guilty U/s 302/201, IPC. We find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.