Judgment N.N.Singh, J. 1. This jail appeal has been preferred by appellant Babu Ram Tudu against the judgment of conviction dated 31st July, 1991 and order of sentence dated 3.8.91 passed by the Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Trial No. 147 of 1989, by which the sole appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Another accused Pank was acquitted of the charge. No one appeared on behalf of the appellant and hence the appeal was heard and considered with the assistance of the A.P.P. 2. The fact of the prosecution case, shorn of details, may be summarised as under : Tala Soren (PW 9) who is widow of deceased Theba Tudu @ Dheba Tudu, who has her fathers place in the same village Dullu Pradhan Tola seeing quarrel between the appellant and her husband for domestic matters, went to her fathers place in the evening of 24.5.89 and the appellant and Pank Tudu had tied the leg and hand of her husband and had kept them in the room. Next day when she did not see her husband, appellant Babu Ram Tudu and Pank Tudu, she enquired from her mother-in-law but she did not reply and then when she went to river to wash clothes, her maternal father-in-law Lakhi Ram firstly told her that her husband has been taken to police station and when she insisted not to have seen him going, Lakhi Ram disclosed that he has been killed. In her fardbeyan, Tala Soren stated to have informed about it to village Pradhan Nuka Murmu (PW 2) and others who got them searched and in morning this appellant was caught by the villagers and he was asked about her husband this appellant disclosed that he along with Pank Tudu had killed her husband Dheba Tudu and had concealed his dead body in a cave of the hill. Further case of the prosecution is that this appellant went to the cave and showed the dead body of Dheba Tudu in the cave. Fardbeyan of Tala Soren was recorded by the SIM Yadav of Deodagn P.S. on 25.5.89 at 1.00 p.m. and on that basis, Godda Town P.S. case No. 107 of 1989 was registered under Sections 302/201 of the IPC against this appellant and Pank Judge and the police after due investigation, submitted charge-sheet. Fardbeyan of Tala Soren was recorded by the SIM Yadav of Deodagn P.S. on 25.5.89 at 1.00 p.m. and on that basis, Godda Town P.S. case No. 107 of 1989 was registered under Sections 302/201 of the IPC against this appellant and Pank Judge and the police after due investigation, submitted charge-sheet. After cognizance and commitment, this appellant and his brother Pank Tudu were put on trial and whereas this appellant has been convicted as aforesaid and Pank Tudu was acquitted. 3. The defence as gathered from the suggestions put to PWs and the statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Cr PC is that he has been falsely implicated in this case. 4. Altogether 9 PWs were examined by the prosecution in support of its case out of when PW 4 Jetha Tudu, PW 5 Suleman Chandrai Soren and PW 6 Biran Murmu were tendered for cross-examination. PW 7 Chaitanya Prasad Sah and PW 8 Ram Sundar Yadav were formal witnesses who proved formal FIR (Ext. 2) and fardbeyan (marked A for identification) respectively. PW 3 is Dr. Vijay Kumar Bhagat who proved the postmortem report (Ext. 1) and PW 1 Nuka Murmu, PW 2 Nuklal Murmu and PW 9 the. informant Tala Soren are on the point that this appellant made extrajudicial confession before the Pradhan and villagers. No defence witness has been examined. 5. There is no eye-witness in this case and the learned trial Court in paragraph 5 of its judgment described the injuries found by PW 3 Dr. Vijay Kumar Bhagat on the person of the deceased Dheba Tudu when he held post-mortem examination on 27.5.89. The post-mortem report is Exhibit-1. PW 3 stated to have found bruise in the area of two inches in diameter on the left face with fracture of the underlying bone and the lacerated wound 1/2" x 1/2" x 1/2" obliquely placed over chin. PW 3 further stated that on dissection, left mandible was found fractured at several places and hyoid bone was also found fractured. He also found blood clothes present in the trachea and the left eye was found bulging from its socket. The doctor opined that the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Time elapsed since death was within 72 hours. The evidence of PW 3 and the postmortem report (Ext. He also found blood clothes present in the trachea and the left eye was found bulging from its socket. The doctor opined that the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Time elapsed since death was within 72 hours. The evidence of PW 3 and the postmortem report (Ext. 1) go to show that Dheba Tudu died homicidal death within 72 hours of the post-mortem examination. 5-A. There is no eye-witness of the occurrence and PWs 1, 2 and 9 were examined to bring circumstantial evidence against this appellant on the point of extra-judicial confession made by this appellant. The learned trial Court has discussed the evidence of PW 1 Nuku Murmu and PW 2 Nuklal Murmu in paras 7 and 8 of its judgment. Both these witnesses stated that this appellant made extra-judicial confession before them and went to the cave of the hill to show the dead body of Dheba Tudu which the appellant and his brother had kept. PW 9, the informant also supported the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 that this appellant made extra-judicial confession of having killed Dheba Tudu and to have kept his dead body in a cave of the hill which he showed to the villagers. In his statement under Section 313 of the Cr PC, this appellant, however, denied to have made such extra-judicial confession before the villagers and thus, his confession is retracted confession. The learned trial Court has considered this point in its judgment. This is established principle of law that retracted confession can be taken into consideration against the maker and conviction can be based on such retracted confession without corroboration provided the Court is in a position to come to an unhesitating conclusion that the confession was voluntary and true. 6. In a decision of the case Maghar Singh V/s. The State of Punjab reported at AIR 1975 SC 1320 , it was held that evidence furnished on an extra-judicial confession made by the accused to the witnesses cannot be termed to be a tainted evidence and if corroboration is required, it is only by way of abundant caution. If the Court believed the witnesses before whom confession is made and it is satisfied that the confession was voluntary than in such a case conviction can be founded on such evidence alone. If the Court believed the witnesses before whom confession is made and it is satisfied that the confession was voluntary than in such a case conviction can be founded on such evidence alone. Here in the case also PWs 1, 2 and 9 stated that this appellant made extra Judicial confession before them. They were cross-examined but nothing was brought to disbelieve their testimony. From the evidence adduced, it is clear that the extra-judicial confession made by this appellant was voluntary and had not been made on any undue influence, coercion or promise. Moreover, this appellant took the villagers to the cave where he had kept the dead body of Dheba Tudu which also supported the prosecution case and this appellant had made extra-judicial confession leading to recovery of the dead body. The other corroboration circumstance is that this appellant had made such extra-judicial confession and had shown the dead body of deceased in cave is mentioned in fardbeyan itself, and cannot be said to be afterthought. The state of body of deceased found in the cave, that is, the hand of the deceased was tied (para 10 of PW 2) finds support from assertion made in fardbeyan that the appellant had tied his hand and leg and had kept in his room. From these, we find that the trial Court committed no error in relying upon the evidence of extra-judicial confession of the appellant leading to recovery of the dead body of the deceased, and corroborated by other circumstances, mentioned above. 7. The other point involved in this case is that the I.O. has not been examined but no prejudice has been shown to have been caused to the defence as the P.O. has been established and the attention of none of the witnesses was drawn towards any contradictory statement made before the I.O. I find that non-examination of the I.O. is not fatal. Reliance can be placed on a decision reported at AIR 1996 SC 2905 (Behari Prasad V/s. The State of Bihar) in which it was held that "where involvement of accused of committing murder was proved and evidence was in conformity with the case made out in the FIR and also with the medical evidence, the prosecution case will not fall on account of non-examination of the investigating officer. Non-examination of the I.O. does not per-se vitiate the trial. 8. Non-examination of the I.O. does not per-se vitiate the trial. 8. On the basis of the discussion made above and the attending circumstances and after giving anxious consideration of the evidence on record, I find that the trial Court has rightly convicted this appellant under Section 320 of the IPC. 9. In the result, I find no merit in this appeal and it is, accordingly, dismissed. R.N.Prasad, J. 10 I agree.