In Brief
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, who was convicted of narcotic drug trafficking offences based solely on confessional statements made by co-accused. The Court held that a co-accused's confession cannot be used as substantive evidence against another accused and can only lend assurance to independent evidence. Since no material evidence linked the appellant to the crime—he was neither at the arrest site nor possessed the drugs—conviction based exclusively on co-accused statements was inappropriate. The Court applied settled law that requires courts first to examine independent evidence and only then use a co-accused's confession to fortify conclusions already reached from other evidence."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.