SUBRAMANIA GOUNDAN vs THE STATE OF MADRAS.

The Supreme Court held that a confession made before a magistrate is valid even if retracted, provided it is corroborated by other evidence. In this case, the magistrate's question did not constitute an inducement, and the recovery of blood-stained items from the appellant served as sufficient corroboration. The court established that while a retracted confession should ideally be corroborated, it is not an absolute requirement for conviction, as long as the general trend of the confession is supported by evidence.