HARI CHARAN KURMI AND JOGIA HAJAM vs STATE OF BIHAR

The Supreme Court held that a confession made by a co-accused under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act is not substantive evidence against the accused and cannot be the starting point for conviction. The court clarified that while such confessions can be considered, they must be used to support conclusions drawn from other evidence, as established in Ram Prakash v. State of Punjab [1959] S.C.R. 121. The High Court's error in treating the co-accused's confession as primary evidence led to the reversal of the conviction due to insufficient evidence against the appellants.