Judgment P.K.Sinha and C.M.Prasad JJ. 1. The sole appellant has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ("the Code", in short) as well under section 376 of the Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for each offence. The appellant is charged with taking away Fulo Kumari, aged about seven to eight years, from the house in the night to a secluded place and, after raping, to have killed her. 2. The case of the prosecution as per fardbayan of Most. Makko Devi, mother of the victim (Exhibit-3) as recorded on 12.11.1995 at about 6.00 A.M. in her village, is that the informant had three daughters and with two of them along with most of the co-villagers she had attended "Kirtan in the village having gone there at about 10.00 P.M. leaving behind in the house Fulo Kumari by locking the gate. When about midnight she came back she found that though the lock was there but the gate, which was made of bamboo sticks and attached to the pillar with the help of a rope, that rope was cut and the gate was open. She found Fulo Kumari not in the house. She also stated that the house of appellant Sangram Chore was nearby. Then she went back to the place of "Kirtan" and informed villagers whereafter all started searching her daughter. She further stated that every one of the village was present at the "Kirtan" with the solitary absence of Sangram Chore and when she was going to. attend the "Kirtan" she had seen him going towards her house. People also stated that Sangram Chore was not attending the "Kirtan". People started searching him and they found the appellant near the house of Chunni Hansda at a hand-pump. The co-villagers made enquiries from him and in the presence of them he admitted that he had taken away Fulo Kumari from her house, gagged her and taking her to a banana grove he had raped her, but she died which dead body was kept in that banana grove. The people accompanied him to the place of occurrence and Sangram Chore removed banana leaves under which the dead body was hidden and pointed them the victim. Then the dead body, whose ears were also bleeding, was brought to her house and Sangram Chore also told that the injuries were due to his biting. The people accompanied him to the place of occurrence and Sangram Chore removed banana leaves under which the dead body was hidden and pointed them the victim. Then the dead body, whose ears were also bleeding, was brought to her house and Sangram Chore also told that the injuries were due to his biting. Blood also had oozed from her private parts, Sangram Chore confessing that that was result of the rape. Then the people kept him confined. It was also stated that when the people had tried to catch him, he tried to flee away in course of which he had sustained some injuries. 3. The defence of the appellant was that he was falsely implicated because of enmity. In his statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure he denied commission of the offence attributed to him but admitted that on that day a "Kirtan" was being held in the village which he had not attended. 4. Nine witnesses, in all have been examined in this case. P.W. 8. Shamim Ahmad Khan was the Investigating Police Officer and P.W.1, Dr. L. N. Mandal and P. W. 9, Dr. M. Z. Abdin had, respectively, had conducted the post mortem, and had examined the appellant. P.W.5 Bhim Marandi was tendered for cross-examination and his evidence helps neither side. P.W. 6, Birendra Hansda was examined in-chief and just after the cross-examination had commenced, the proceeding was adjourned but it appears that thereafter he could not be brought back to the witness stand to finish the cross-examination. Therefore, the prosecution case, which is based on circumstantial evidences and the extra-judicial confession of the appellant rests upon the evidences of Paghrai Marandi (P.W. 4), Churku Marandi (P.W.3), Chhotelal Marandi (P.W. 4) and Makko Devi (P.W. 7), the informant herself. First the evidences of the non-official witnesses may be scanned. P.W. 2 in his evidence has supported about holding of "Kirtan" in the night attended by them including the informant, stating that her daughter was in home. He testified about the hulla raised by the informant about missing of the girl and said that then they tried to find out as to who was not in the village and it came out that the appellant was not in the "Kirtan".He was searched out at the tube-well washing his hands and feet. He testified about the hulla raised by the informant about missing of the girl and said that then they tried to find out as to who was not in the village and it came out that the appellant was not in the "Kirtan".He was searched out at the tube-well washing his hands and feet. First he denied any knowledge but when the queries persisted he admitted that he had taken the victim who could be found in the banana grove of Pirthavi Chand Yadav. The witnesses went with him and he pointed the place where a dead body was recovered with injury marks on ears and neck and it could be seen that she was raped thereafter, the dead body was brought to the house of Makko Devi. He also is a witness to the inquest report (Exhibit-1). 5. P.W. 3 gave evidence similarly about missing of the girl and their having detected that the appellant was not to be found in the village whereafter his having been located washing his hands and feet at the hand pump. He also supported that on enquiry he admitted that he had taken away the victim girl in the banana field. He also said that they accompanied him to the banana field and he pointed out the place where dead body was covered with leaves. The witness said that the dead body was brought back and that they had found injuries on the ears and also said that she was throttled and raped. To the Court this witness said that he came to the conclusion that she was raped because her pant was open. P. W. 4 has similarly supported the prosecution case, and about finding of Sangram Chore at the tube well who confessed that he had taken away the girl and had killed her. He admitted that he had kept her in the banana field and also confessed that he had raped the girl. When he was asked to show the place he took them to the banana field of Pirthavi Chand and pointed the place from where the dead body was recovered, covered with banana leaves, and brought to the house of Makko Devi. He also said that there were blood stained injuries on the ears and sign of throttling, and the blood oozing out from her private parts. He also said that there were blood stained injuries on the ears and sign of throttling, and the blood oozing out from her private parts. He also was a signatory upon the first information report which signature he identified. 6. P.W. 6 also has fully supported these facts in the examination-in-chief but, as stated, he was not produced subsequently for his full cross-examination. However, his evidence is on the record and simply cannot be taken out therefrom. However, his evidence can hardly be considered in the aid of prosecution because the defence was not accorded full opportunity to cross-examine him. Defence, of course, can make use of such evidence. 7. The informant, P.W. 7 also has supported the prosecution case and the finding of the appellant at the hand-pump washing his hands and clothes, who first denied having seen the girl but later admitted that the girl was at the banana grove whereafter the witnesses accompanied him up to the grove of Hukum Chand where he pointed the girl who was lying dead, covered by banana leaves. She also supported that there had been injuries on the body of the girl and blood was oozing out from the private parts. 8. Before proceeding further and examining other evidences on the record such as of the Investigating Officer and the doctor the evidence of these witnesses particularly with reference to the extrajudicial confession made by the appellant, may be scrutinised in the light of the arguments placed before this Court by the learned counsel for the appellant. The first objection was that in this case no independent witness has been examined. Learned counsel pointed out that P.W.4 had admitted that he was a gotia of the informant and P.W.2 admittedly was his son. P.W. 3 also said that Makko Devi was her sister-in-law (Bhabhi). 9. It is now well settled that simply because a witness is a relative of the informant or of the victim, will not in itself make his evidence shorn of value. Such evidence has to be scrutinised with more care and caution but if after such scrutiny it is found that the evidence is worth reliance, such evidence can form basis for conviction. 10. Before further proceeding it may also be noted here that all these witnesses were rustic witnesses and tribal. Such evidence has to be scrutinised with more care and caution but if after such scrutiny it is found that the evidence is worth reliance, such evidence can form basis for conviction. 10. Before further proceeding it may also be noted here that all these witnesses were rustic witnesses and tribal. Most of the cross-examination has been noted by the learned lower court in question and answer form which also gives an insight as to how the witnesses were cross-examined. As we will see the evidence of these witnesses, in so far as extra-judicial confession is concerned, is reliable, hence their being relatives will not take away the credibility from their evidences. 11. Learned counsel also has argued that P.W. 3 had said that one Balram Mandal and Birendra Hansda had gone to inform about the incident to the police station, whereafter the witness was questioned as to whether they had come back with Daroga and the answer was in affirmative. It was argued that what they had said at the police station, therefore, was the first information which has been withheld by the prosecution. The Investigating Police Officer, however, in his evidence clearly has stated that on the relevant date he had heard floating rumours about a murder having been committed in that village, which he recorded as Sanha and went to Baburbanna village where he recorded the statement of Makko Devi. On this point he was cross-examined also when he was specifically asked as to who had informed the Police. Here the witness said that he had heard just floating rumours on which Sanha entry was made. From his evidence it is evident that it might be that two persons had proceeded at the place of occurrence on hearing rumours that started floating in the night hours itself. It may be that he had met those persons in the way. 12. Even taking into account this argument that those two witnesses were first to reach the Police Station, of which there is no evidence on record, then not recording first information report on such statement of an outsider is not an act which could vitiate the prosecution case. It may be that he had met those persons in the way. 12. Even taking into account this argument that those two witnesses were first to reach the Police Station, of which there is no evidence on record, then not recording first information report on such statement of an outsider is not an act which could vitiate the prosecution case. The Police Officer on getting information about commission of a cognizable offence could decide to go to the place of occurrence and to find out himself if such an offence was committed, and having so satisfied himself, to proceed to record the statement which would be the first information report. 13. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that only evidence on record was the extra-judicial confession of the appellant, but from the evidence of witnesses as well of P.W.8 it was clear that before he made such a confession he was assaulted. It was argued that in that view of the matter, the entire evidence about the appellant making the extra-judicial confession stands vitiated. 14. Evidence in this regard may be seen. 15. P.W. 2 was asked a question in cross-examination as to whether Sangram Chore revealed what he had said after he was assaulted. The answer was that yes, one or two persons had given one or two slaps. P.W. 3 was put a leading question that whether the appellant did not first admit his guilt but did so when he was thrashed. The answer here again was in affirmative. Here it may also be noted that P.W. 3 had said, in cross-examination, that the co-villagers had brought the appellant to his house where he was tied down, but nothing else was done with him. In cross-examination he also said that he was so tied up at about 3.00 A.M. and the Police came at about 4.00 A.M. On the same point a question was asked to P.W. 4. The question was that as to whether at the time of making confession the appellant was tied down, but the answer was in negative stating that he was tied down later. The question was that as to whether at the time of making confession the appellant was tied down, but the answer was in negative stating that he was tied down later. This witness was again asked as to whether when he confessed, the people asked him to show the place and when the answer was in affirmative, the next question was that whether the appellant asked them to go and see for themselves, but the answer was that he said so but the witnesses did not believe him and insisted that he should himself go and show the place. The next question was as to whether he was threatened for that, but the answer was that no threatening was given. The informant was also cross-examined on the same point. When he was asked as to whether the witness had denied any knowledge of the incident, the witness answered in affirmative but said that thereafter he himself revealed (what he had done). Then a leading question was asked as to whether when the appellant denied, he was assaulted and threatened by villagers whereafter he made the revelation, at which answer was in affirmative. This witness also said that the place of occurrence was shown to the Police Officer and also informed the Court that at the place of occurrence there was no sign of any animal coming there. Therefore, it will be seen that answer to some leading questions were given in affirmative but evidence is also on the record that no threatening was given and at any rate, the only evidence about assault is that one or two persons had given one or two slaps to the appellant. 16. Learned counsel thereafter pointed out the evidence of P.W. 9 who had examined the appellant on 12.11.1995 at about 12.30 P.M. He found one swelling with tenderness on right back of chest, another swelling with tenderness on left back of chest and a swelling with tenderness on the left side of the fore-head. These were simple injuries, two caused on the back. 17. There is no law that an accused cannot be convicted only on extra-judicial confession. If the evidence is believable then a conviction can be made even on uncorroborated extra-judicial confession. These were simple injuries, two caused on the back. 17. There is no law that an accused cannot be convicted only on extra-judicial confession. If the evidence is believable then a conviction can be made even on uncorroborated extra-judicial confession. In the present case a number of witnesses has said about the appellant making extrajudicial confession, admitting his guilt about taking away of the girl to a solitary place and having raped, and also to have killed, her. But some evidence is also on the record that he also had received some beating at the hands of some co-villagers. The question is, as to whether this particular evidence can nullify the reliability of the extra-judicial confession made by the appellant. 18. The situation can well be visualised. A small girl was missing. Though the size of the village has not come in the evidence but it has come that the appellant was missing from the "kirtan" and the appellant himself admitted this in his statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, when suspicion against the appellant cropped up, and when the appellant at that hour of the night was found washing his hands and legs, the temper of the co-villagers can only be guessed. 19. If it was just a question of making his confession after some assault, some doubts could have been created about the voluntariness of the confession but in this case the confession of the appellant was followed by his taking the co-villagers to the place of occurrence which was at a lonely place. According to the evidence of Investigating Officer the place of occurrence was about three hundred yards west to the village, the banana field of one Pirthavi Chand Yadav. Therefore, the witness, after his confession, not only took the villagers to that place but also pointed out the dead body which was covered with banana leaves and, as admitted by him, the girl had died after rape, blood oozing out from her private parts and there were biting injuries also on the person of the victim which had also found place in the inquest report. No amount of assault could have made the appellant to take the witnesses to the place of occurrence and to point the dead body which he had claimed to have concealed after commission of the crime, unless he exactly knew where the dead body was, and why. The entire episode had taken place in the dead of night and there is no intervening circumstance to doubt the evidence, or to show that there was any possibility of any one else taking the victim girl to the place of occurrence, from her house where she was sleeping, so as to provide an escape route to the appellant. The dead body was recovered in that condition soon after the occurrence. Therefore, this point of some small assault on the appellant will not vilify the extrajudicial confession made by him. 20. Now coming to the evidence of the two doctors, P.W.1, Dr. N. L. Mandal, had examined the dead body the next day at 4.30 P.M. and had found following injuries : "(i) Lacerated wound 1 and 1/2" x 1/4" on margin of lower part of pinna of right ear: (ii) Tooth mark 1 and 1/2" behind the right ear near injury no. (i); (iii) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/4" on margin of lower half of pinna of left ear; (iv) Left eye injured to red & 1/2" abrasion on outer angle of left eye; (v) Nail marks on upper portion of neck on left side; (vi) Vagina torn, dialated & filled with blood & blood clots." 21. This witness did not only find tooth mark at the ear but also laceration and abrasion, as well the nail marks on the upper portion of the neck. The doctor though has not given any express opinion about rape but he also found the vagina to be torn, dilated and filled with blood and blood clots. Such condition of the private part of the little girl hardly need an opinion of the expert, as to whether she was raped. No doubt, the doctor should have given clear findings in this regard and should have expressed his opinion when he found the vagina to be torn. But this finding confirms the confession of the appellant. The doctor also came to the conclusion that cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. He also said in cross-examination that strangulation was done by putting pressure with hands. But this finding confirms the confession of the appellant. The doctor also came to the conclusion that cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. He also said in cross-examination that strangulation was done by putting pressure with hands. The post mortem report is Exhibit-1. 22. P.W. 9, Dr. M. Z. Abdin when he examined the appellant, gave following medical opinion: "(i) Matted pubic hair due to presence of semen; (ii) Foul smell; (iii) Semen present completely dry on glans of the private part of the appellant and semen also present completely dry on both the thigh near scrotal region." The report is Exhibit-6. 23. It has been pointed out that it has come in the evidence that this appellant was married. However, there is not even a suggestion on the record that such findings were because of his cohabitation with his wife. Therefore, such findings also strongly corroborate the confession of the appellant. 24. A point that has not been placed but noticed is that whereas P.Ws. 2, 4 and 8 (the Investigating Officer) have clearly stated that the banana field belonged to Pirthavi Chand Yadav, P.W. 7 had taken the name of Hukum Chand in that regard. But there is no doubt that from the particular banana field the dead body was recovered. P.W. 8 in cross-examination has also said, when asked about blood marks at the place of occurrence, that he had found light spots at the place of occurrence but those had almost been destroyed because of tramplings by feet. Therefore, when the place of occurrence is established, what P.W. 7 said. is not very important, and Hukum Chand may also have same association with the field, said to be of Prithvi Chand. 25. The Investigating Officer also stated, while inspecting place of occurrence, that it was the banana field of Pirthavi Chand Yadav and in the middle of field he had seen some banana leaves kept. At that spot he also saw the signs of knees and elbows and when he made the accused lie down at that spot, those marks tallied. 26. From the evidence following points stand proved: (i) That the informant had gone to attend a "Kirtan". At that spot he also saw the signs of knees and elbows and when he made the accused lie down at that spot, those marks tallied. 26. From the evidence following points stand proved: (i) That the informant had gone to attend a "Kirtan". where other village people were also present except Sangram Chore, leaving behind her daughter in the house ; (ii) That she came back and found the lock intact but the rope cut and the gate, made of bamboo sticks, open and the girl missing. Here it may be stated that the Investigating Officer had also inspected the house of the informant and found that there was a gate at the entrance which was tied to a pillar, with the help of rope which rope was found cut and if that rope was cut the door could be opened without breaking the lock; (iii) That the informant told her co- villagers about missing of the victim girl and it was also noticed that Sangram Chore was also missing; (iv) That the witnesses found Sangram Chore washing his hands and feet at a hand-pump where he was caught; (v) On query from the co-villagers he admitted that he had taken away the girl and had killed her after raping, in the banana field; (vi) That the appellant took the witnesses to the place of occurrence, which was away from village and at a lonely place. Inside the banana grove he pointed out the place of occurrence from where the dead body, lying on the ground and covered with banana leaves, was recovered with blood and injury marks upon the body, including the private parts of the girl; (vii) That the appellant was kept confined by the co-villagers and handed over to the Police Officer when he came to the village in the early hours; (viii) The post mortem report also supports injuries upon the dead body, the death by strangulation, and rape upon her; (ix) Medical examination of the appellant also supports the prosecution case. 27. Therefore, not only that the attending circumstances complete the chain of events but also prove that the appellant and appellant alone could have committed the offence. There is also extra-judicial confession of the appellant supported by his pointing the place of occurrence to the witnesses. 28. 27. Therefore, not only that the attending circumstances complete the chain of events but also prove that the appellant and appellant alone could have committed the offence. There is also extra-judicial confession of the appellant supported by his pointing the place of occurrence to the witnesses. 28. In the result, we find that the learned lower Court was right in arriving at the conclusion that it was this appellant who had committed rape upon the deceased and had killed her. Therefore, no interference is called for. 29. This appeal, being meritless, is dismissed. Ms. Gunjita Gupta has appeared as amicus-curiae in this case and has argued the case of the appellant. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Ms. Gupta to the Court. Her remuneration will be paid by the Legal Aid Authority of this Court.