In which of the following case, it was held that “an accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. But the rule of practice is that it is prudent to look for corroboration of the evidence of an accomplice by other independent evidence. The rule of practice is based on human experience and is incorporated in illustration (b) to section 114 of the Evidence Act which says that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated in material particulars.