Case Note & Summary
The case involved a gruesome incident in which 35 individuals lost their lives, leading to the trial of 13 accused under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and the Indian Penal Code. The Designated Court convicted several accused based primarily on a confessional statement made by Bihari Manjhi, one of the accused. The statement was recorded by a police inspector in the presence of the Superintendent of Police, but the court later found significant procedural irregularities in how the statement was obtained and presented. The appellants contended that the confessional statement was inadmissible due to the failure to comply with the procedural requirements of the TADA Act, specifically the lack of timely submission to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Supreme Court agreed, noting that the confessional statement was recorded under questionable circumstances and lacked corroborative evidence from other witnesses. The court highlighted the necessity of adhering to procedural safeguards to protect individual liberties and concluded that the confessional statement could not be relied upon for conviction. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the accused, set aside the convictions, and ordered their immediate release if not required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Confessional Statements - Admissibility and Evidentiary Value - Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 15 - The court found that the confessional statement recorded by the police was not admissible due to procedural lapses, including failure to send the statement to the Chief Judicial Magistrate as required. The court emphasized the importance of following procedural safeguards to ensure the liberty of citizens is protected. Held that the confessional statement should not have been relied upon for conviction (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the confessional statement was admissible and sufficient to convict the accused under the TADA Act and IPC.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed Criminal Appeal No.752 of 2001 and Criminal Appeal No.765 of 2001, set aside the convictions, and acquitted the appellants of the charges against them.
Law Points
- Admissibility of confessional statements
- evidentiary value of statements
- separation of judiciary and executive
- procedural requirements under TADA Act
