In Brief
The appellant was convicted of murdering an elderly couple along with three other accused persons. On appeal, he challenged his conviction arguing that it was based primarily on the testimony of accomplice Raju Rao without sufficient independent corroboration. The Supreme Court held that while an accomplice is a competent witness, as a matter of practice it is unsafe to convict on accomplice testimony alone without corroboration in material particulars from independent sources. The Court found that the Trial Court and High Court correctly identified substantial corroborative evidence—including fingerprints, recovered stolen goods, eyewitness accounts of presence, and forensic evidence—that connected the appellant to the crime. The conviction was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.