( 192 )
Shaw J.
The King tSidda

. In numerous Indian eases, of which I may cite as an exampleQueen Empress v. Gkarya,* it has been held that a retracted con-fession, if proved to be voluntarily made, can be acted upon alongwith the other evidence in the case, and that there is no rule of lawthat a retracted confession must be supported by independentreliable evidence corroborating it in material particulars. Theweight to be given to such a confession must, as stated by the Courtin its judgment in the case of Queen Empress v. Raman,2 dependupon the circumstances under which the confession wa6 originallygiven, and the circumstances under which it was retracted, includingthe reasons given by the prisoner for his retraction.
The two cases above cited were both cases similar to that underconsideration, where accused made statements amounting toconfessions before the Magistrate and subsequently retracted themat the trial.
In my opinion the conviction in the present case is justified by theevidence, and I would consequently affirm it.
De Sampayo-J.—I agree.
11.1, fi. 19 Bom. 728.
« /. L. R. 21 Mad. 88.