PASAYAT, J. ( 1 ) IN this appeal from District Jail, Phulbani, Bohe Mallik (hereinafter referred to as the accused) calls in question the legalit7 of his Conviction for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC) and the sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by the learned Sessions Judge, Phulbani. ( 2 ) THE accusations which led to the trial of the accused are that on 16. 8. 1988 at about 2 p. m. he intentionally caused the death of one Pujara alias Aspati Digal (hereinafter referred to as the deceased ). The prosecution case is that the daughter of the accused was sick for a pretty long tire and the deceased promised to cure her provided the accused arranged materials for the Puja. Accordingly the accused arranged one pig, a cock and an egg on 15. 8. 1988, but her daughters condition became serious and on 16. 8. 1988 she died. At this the accused was infuriated with the deceased and with the intention of finishing him went of his village with an arm He concealed the axe next a mango tree of Pattodeo hills. He told the deceased that his daughter was serious and requested him to accompany him for enchanting Mantra. On the way he told the deceased that he would go for urination and went near the mango tree where he had kept the axe. He brought out the exeunt dealt blows resulting in bleeding injuries and subsequently the deceased succumbed. One Biswanath Digal (P. Ws. 6) had witnessed the occurrence. The accused in a furious mood went to Prafulla Kumar Naik (P. Ws. 12), the Grama Rakhi of the Village at about 5 p. m. holding the axe in his hand. As the axe was stained with blood and the accused was looking furious, the Grama Rakhi was frightened and asked the accused as-to what had happened. The, accused confessed that be cause of Ineffectiveness of the deceased to get his daughter cured, he had killed him. On hearing this from the accused, P. Ws. 2 brought him to Balliguda Police Station and. lodged me First Information Report upon which investigation was undertaken and charge sheet was submitted. ( 3 ) THE plea of me accused was complete denial of the prosecution case. In his statement under Section 313 Cr. On hearing this from the accused, P. Ws. 2 brought him to Balliguda Police Station and. lodged me First Information Report upon which investigation was undertaken and charge sheet was submitted. ( 3 ) THE plea of me accused was complete denial of the prosecution case. In his statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. he pleaded the had not killed the deceased; but Biswanath Digal (P. Ws. 6) had killed the deceased. ( 4 ) ELEVEN witnesses were examined to further the prosecution case. P. Ws. 6 claimed to have witnessed the occurrence of assault by the accused, without knowing that the deceased was me victim. He deposed that he herd from the wife of the deceased mat her husband vas lying dead near the mango tree in the Pattodeo hill and could link the assaults to the deceased. P. Ws. 7 is another person before whom the accused, it was claimed, had confessed about the killing. The learned trial Judge found the evidence to be credible, cogent and convicted the accused and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. ( 5 ) IN support of the appeal, me learned counsel for the accused urged that the evidence of P. Ws. 6 is incredible and should not be believed. Additionally it is submitted mat the so-called extra judicial confession before P. Ws. 2 and 7 should not have been acted upon. The learned counsel for State on the other hand supported the judgment of conviction and sentence. ( 6 ) ON a co-joint reading of the evidence of P. Ws. 2, 6 and 7, it is clear that their evidence is credible and cogent. P. W 6 whom the accused indicated to be the real author of the crime, has categorically stated about the assaults he had seen and the places where the assaults were given and the time when they were infected. Though there is some amount of confusion about the distance from which he saw it, the same is inconsequential because he was acquainted with the accused being a person belonging to the lower strata of the sockty there was confusion about the distance. P. Ws. 2 is the Grama Rakhi before whom the confession is stated to have been made. Basing upon the confession, the FIR was lodged by P. Ws. 2. P. Ws. 2 is the Grama Rakhi before whom the confession is stated to have been made. Basing upon the confession, the FIR was lodged by P. Ws. 2. An extra-judicial confession like any other piece of evidence has to be tested on the touch Stone of credibility. It is not a weak piece of evidence as believed by many. Corroboration cannot be insisted upon in all cases. It would all depend on the circumstances under which the extra-judicial confession was made. It can, without any corroboration, form basis of conviction, if found credible. It is not the case of the accused that the witness was inimically disposed towards him. As observed by us in Khageswar Khatua v. State a confession before a Grama Rakhi can be relied upon. Additionally there is evidence of P. Ws. 7 about the confession. Where extra - judicial confession is a part of the prosecution amount, Court has to find out whether the witness is a person on whom the accused could have reposed confidence. In, the instant case, P. Ws. 7 is a co-villager and P. Ws. 2 is a Grama Rakhi. Therefore, there is nothing unusual in the accused confessing before P. Ws. 1. They have described the a confession in detail and the conclusion Of the learned trial Judge that the extra-judicial confession was voluntary and was, therefore, acceptable cannot be faulted. ( 7 ) IN view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in this appeal which fails and is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.