Case Note & Summary
The case involved the appellant, Mohd. Ayub Dar, who challenged his conviction for murder and terrorism under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and the Indian Penal Code. The incident occurred on 21.5.1990, when Mirwaiz Moulvi Farooq was shot by three assailants, including the appellant, who were part of a conspiracy by the Hizbul Mujahideen to eliminate him due to his political influence. The trial court convicted the appellant based on confessions and witness testimonies, despite challenges regarding the reliability of the evidence. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, emphasizing the validity of the confession and the established fact of homicidal death. The court noted that the confession was made voluntarily and corroborated by circumstantial evidence, while also addressing the procedural aspects of the trial and the admissibility of evidence under the TADA Act. The court concluded that the prosecution had sufficiently proven the appellant's involvement in the conspiracy and the murder, affirming the trial court's decision and the sentences imposed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Confession - Admissibility of Confession - Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 15 - The court examined the validity of the confession made by the appellant under the TADA Act, determining that it was recorded voluntarily and in the language understood by the accused, thus admissible as evidence. Held that the confession was credible and supported by circumstantial evidence (Paras 18-24). B) Criminal Law - Homicidal Death - Proof of Homicide - Indian Penal Code, Section 302 - The court confirmed that the death of Mirwaiz Moulvi Farooq was homicidal, resulting from gunshot injuries, and established that the assailants entered into a conspiracy to murder him. Held that the prosecution successfully proved the nature of the death (Paras 15-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved the offence under Section 302 of the RPC independently of the confession and whether the confession was admissible.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant for the offences under Section 3(3) of the TADA Act and Section 302 of the IPC, affirming the trial court's findings and sentences.
Law Points
- Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act
- 1987
- Section 3(3)
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 302
- Criminal Procedure Code
- 1973
- Section 15
- Section 374
