JUDGEMENT S. P. Rajkhowa, J.:- This appeal arises out of an order of conviction and sentence passed on 25-5-1989 by the learned Sessions Judge, Malda in Sessions Case No. 36/ 86 under Sections 302/34 and 201, I.P.C. The accused appellant was found guilty under Section 304 part 1, I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. He was further found guilty under Section 201, I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer rigourous imprisonment for 3 years. Both sentences were to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that information was reached to the police station at Malda on 24-9-1984 that a dead body was found floating in a tank at Sayedpur village. Acting on this information the Officer-in-Charge, Malda Police Station along with force visited the village and found a dead body floating in a tank. The dead body was lifted from the tank. It was identified by Ganesh Mardi and others to be of Khanjoy Mardi. Police held the inquest over the dead body and sent the same for post mortem examination. On the basis of a verbal complaint given by Ganesh Mardi which was reduced into writing, police started Malda P.S. Case No. 10 dated 24th Sept. 1984 under Section 302/ 201, I.P.C. Police tried to arrest the accused persons but they were absconding. Subsequently accused Rabi Hembram and Sarkar Mardi were arrested and forwarded to the court respectively on 11-11-1984 and 12-11-1984. Accused Sarkar Mardi made a confessional statement before the court on 13-11-1984 which was recorded by a Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Malda (P.W. 20). After completion of the investigation police submitted charge-sheet against both the accused under Sections 302/201/34, I.P.C. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate committed both the accused to the court of sessions to stand the trial. It transpires that accused Rabi Hembram jumped bail and issue of proclamation and attachment was of no avail. So the case against him was filed and the trial proceeded against accused Sarkar Mardi. He was charged under Sections 302/34 and 201, I.P.C. He pleaded not guilty. In the trial as many as 21 P.Ws. were examined out of which 6 P.Ws. were tendered by the prosecution for cross-examination. So the case against him was filed and the trial proceeded against accused Sarkar Mardi. He was charged under Sections 302/34 and 201, I.P.C. He pleaded not guilty. In the trial as many as 21 P.Ws. were examined out of which 6 P.Ws. were tendered by the prosecution for cross-examination. On the basis of the evidence on record the learned Sessions Judge has found the accused guilty under Section 304, Part 1, I.P.C. and S. 201, I.P.C. and convicted and sentenced him thereunder as stated above. Hence the appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged before us that the accused could not engage an Advocate to defend him at his own cost. So it was the duty of the State to provide all facilities for his defence. This was provided o doubt but not from the very beginning. As such it is contended by the learned counsel that the accused did not get State Legal Aid as provided by Art. 21 of the Constitution from the very beginning i.e. from the stage where he was brought before the learned Magistrate who recorded the confession. His second submission is that the confession is not a voluntary one and so the conviction of the accused solely based on such confession is not sustainable in law. His third contention is that the accused/appellant who belongs to the Santal community and who does not properly know the Bengali language was not helped by an interpreter to be engaged by the State. 4. Elaborating the first point the learned counsel for the appellant has quoted extensively from the observations of the Supreme Court in Khatri v. State of Bihar, reported in 1981 Cri LJ 470: ( AIR 1981 SC 928 ). The Supreme Court enjoined therein that "the State is under a constitutional mandate to provide free legal aid to an accused person who is unable to secure legal service on account of indigence and whatever is necessary for this purpose has to be done by the State. Moreover this constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to an indigent accused does not arise only when the trial commences but also attaches when the accused is for the first time produced before the Magistrate. Moreover this constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to an indigent accused does not arise only when the trial commences but also attaches when the accused is for the first time produced before the Magistrate. That is the stage at which an accused person needs competent legal advice and representation and no procedure can be said to be reasonable, fair and just which denies legal advice and representation to meet at this stage". In the case in hand the accused did not get the advice of a counsel at the time when he made the confession. But legal aid was offered to him before the Sessions Court by engaging Mrs. Prativa Ghatak to defend him. A similar question cropped up before this Court in the case of Abed Ali Jamadar v. State reported in 1988 C Cr LR (Cal) 15: (1988 Cri LJ 354). A Division Bench constituted with Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sankar Bhattacharya and one of us Hore, J. considered the Supreme Court decision and also a Gauhati High Court decision reported in (1982) 1 Cr LJ 216, State of Assam v. Rabindra Nath Guha. The ratio decidendi arrived at in the case of Abed Ali Jamadar is that non-engagement of a defence counsel by the State at the stage of recording a confession will not prejudice the accused if it is found that the confessional statement, put to strict test, is voluntary. So this point is found to be correlative with the second and while discussing the second point we shall see whether non-engagement of a defence Lawyer at the stage of recording confession was prejudicial to the accused. 5. P.W. 20 Himadri Guha Roy was the Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Malda on 12-11-1984. He has deposed that on that day accused Sarkar Mardi was produced before him for recording his statement under Section 164, Cr. P.C. as per order of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malda. The accused wanted to confess and so the learned Magistrate gave him 24 hours for reflection and sent him to jail custody for keeping him in segregation. Accordingly accused Sarkar Mardi was produced before him from judicial custody on 13-11-1984. Before recording the confession, he gave all due caution to the accused and cautioned him that if he made a confessional statement that may be used against him. Accordingly accused Sarkar Mardi was produced before him from judicial custody on 13-11-1984. Before recording the confession, he gave all due caution to the accused and cautioned him that if he made a confessional statement that may be used against him. He recorded the confession in his chamber and at that time no police personnel was present. The accused understood that he was making the statement before a Magistrate and not a police officer and on query of the learned Magistrate the accused specifically stated that police had not influenced him in any manner by way of threat or promise. After recording the confession he explained the same to the accused who accepted it to be correctly recorded. He gave a certificate to that effect. The confessional statement is marked Ext. 6. In our opinion the accused has made the confession voluntarily and at the same time we find from the facts and circumstances of the case that there is a general corroboration to the confessional statement. As such the confession is not only voluntary but it is trust-wrothy. The learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the confession as according to him the same suffers from some serious infirmities, for example, the learned Magistrate did not put to the accused as to why he was going to make confession. The learned counsel has relied upon AIR 1978 SC 1544 : (1978 Cri LJ 1614), Devendra Prasad Tiwari v. State of U.P. But we do not find any serious infirmities in the manner of recording the confession of the accused by the learned Magistrate P.W. 20. The substance of the confession is that while the accused, deceased Khanjoy and another were returning from Futanigunj Hat at Sayedpur after taking 'Tari' (juice of date tree) which made them highly intoxicated, Khanjoy stated that he had killed 4 persons by his witch craft and that he would kill 2 more. Hearing this the accused asked him as to who would be his next victim. Khanjoy told him that he should not discuss that matter too much otherwise he himself would be the next victim. Hearing this from Khanjoy the accused along with Rabi Hembram killed him by giving lathi blows and threw the dead body into a tank. Dr. D.P. Das held the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. Khanjoy told him that he should not discuss that matter too much otherwise he himself would be the next victim. Hearing this from Khanjoy the accused along with Rabi Hembram killed him by giving lathi blows and threw the dead body into a tank. Dr. D.P. Das held the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. In his absence the post mortem examination report was proved by P.W. 21, Dr. T. Mondal. Dr. Das found 4 bruise injuries on the chest and one lacerated wound on the occipital region of the scalp, right side. Dr. Das opined that the deceased had died due to shock and hamorrhage as a result of injuries sustained which were ante mortem and homicidal in nature. Dr. T. Mondal corroborates the finding of Dr. Das. Dr. Mondal further opined that these injuries might be caused by blunt weapon like lathi. 6. Under the facts stated and discussed above we hold that the confession which is voluntary gets general corroboration from the medical evidence and the recovery of the body of the deceased from a tank. As such the non-engagement of a defence counsel at the stage of recording confession has not caused any miscarriage of justice. 7. Regarding the point that the accused did not know Bengali and therefore, the State or the Court ought to have engaged an interpreter from the beginning of the trial, we find that the evidence was recorded in Bengali in presence of the accused all through and he did not raise any objection to it from the time of recording the confession onwards. We find from the confessional statement itself that he was conversant with the Bengali language and he had no difficulty at all in understanding the Bengali language while the Court's proceedings were conducted. Only at the penultimate stage, i.e., when the accused was examined under Section 313, Cr.P. C. an interpreter was engaged. In our opinion even if the interpreter was not engaged at that stage no prejudice would have caused to the accused. 8. In the result we do not find any substance in the appeal. The conviction should, however, be altered to one under Sections 304, Part I/34, I. P. C. and 201 read with 34, I.P.C. and we do accordingly. In our opinion even if the interpreter was not engaged at that stage no prejudice would have caused to the accused. 8. In the result we do not find any substance in the appeal. The conviction should, however, be altered to one under Sections 304, Part I/34, I. P. C. and 201 read with 34, I.P.C. and we do accordingly. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we hold that justice would be met if the sentence under Section 304, Part I/34, I.P.C. is reduced from 7 years to 4 years and accordingly we reduce the same. There will be no interference in the sentence under Section 201/34, I.P.C. Both the sentences shall run concurrently as ordered by the learned trial Judge. He shall get the benefit of set off under Section 428, Cr.P.C. 9. In the result the appeal stands dismissed with modification and alteration in the sentence as indicated above. 10. Before we part with, we would like to make a few observations. In this trial so many witnesses were tendered by the prosecution for cross-examination by the accused. In our opinion this practice should be done away with as it is not in confirmity with the Code of Criminal Procedure 1974. 11. J. N. HORE, J.:- . I agree. Appeal dismissed.