Supreme Court Allows Prosecution to Use Confessional Statements in Terrorism Case — Clarifies Admissibility Under TADAA. Citing Section 15 of TADAA, the court ruled that confessions recorded in different cases can be admissible if statutory requirements are met.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved the State of Gujarat challenging a trial court's order that disallowed the use of confessional statements recorded from accused persons during investigations of different crimes. The trial court had ruled that confessions could only be used if recorded during the investigation of the specific offence under trial. The Supreme Court examined the admissibility of confessions under Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADAA). The court noted that the confessions must be recorded by a police officer of a certain rank and that the trial must be for an offence under TADAA. The court found that the confessions could be admissible even if recorded in relation to different crimes, as long as they met the statutory requirements. The court also addressed the implications of the death of one of the accused, Abdul Latif, and clarified that his confession could still be relevant under Section 32(3) of the Evidence Act, despite the inability to try him alongside the remaining accused. Ultimately, the court allowed the appeals, set aside the trial court's order, and permitted the prosecution to use the confessional statements in the ongoing trials.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Admissibility of Confessions - Use of Confessional Statements Recorded in Different Cases - Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 15 - The court held that confessions recorded under Section 15 of TADAA are admissible in evidence even if recorded in relation to a different crime, provided the statutory requirements are met. The court emphasized that there is no prohibition against using such confessions merely because they were recorded in a different case (Paras 1-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether confessional statements recorded in one case can be used as evidence in another case under TADAA.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the trial court's order, and permitted the prosecution to use the confessional statements recorded under Section 15 of TADAA in the ongoing trials.

Law Points

  • Admissibility of confessions
  • Section 15 TADAA
  • Evidence Act
  • Section 10
  • Section 32(3) Evidence Act
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • 1973
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1998 LawText (SC) (04) 14

1998-04-03

M.K. Mukherjee, K.T. Thomas

State of Gujarat

Mohammed Atik and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to the admissibility of confessional statements recorded in different cases.

Remedy Sought

State of Gujarat sought permission to use confessional statements as evidence.

Filing Reason

Trial court disallowed the use of confessions recorded in other cases.

Previous Decisions

Trial court ruled that confessions could only be used if recorded during the investigation of the specific offence under trial.

Issues

Whether confessional statements recorded in one case can be used as evidence in another case under TADAA. The impact of the death of an accused on the admissibility of their confessional statement.

Submissions/Arguments

The prosecution argued that confessions recorded under TADAA should be admissible regardless of the case they were recorded in. The defense contended that confessions made in different cases cannot be used as evidence in the current trial.

Ratio Decidendi

Confessions recorded under Section 15 of TADAA are admissible in evidence even if recorded in relation to a different crime, provided the statutory requirements are met.

Judgment Excerpts

The question therefore is whether the prosecution be permitted to introduce and prove the confessional statement of an accused alleged to have been made during the investigation of another offence committed on a different date, during the trial of that accused in another crime. It is clear from the above section that a confessional statement recorded in accordance with the requirements contained in the Section becomes admissible in spite of the ban contained in Section 25 of the Evidence Act or Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Procedural History

The trial court disallowed the use of confessional statements, leading to the State of Gujarat filing special leave petitions challenging this order.

Acts & Sections

  • Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987: Section 15
  • Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 10, Section 32(3)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Reverses High Court Judgment on Tax Refund and Interest for Non-Resident Shippers. The court held that payments made under Section 172(4) of the Income-tax Act are treated as advance tax, thus entitling assessees to interest on excess p...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Promotion of Employee Despite Pending Disciplinary and Criminal Proceedings - Seeks Reconsideration of Eligibility for Supervisory Clerk Post. The Court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's case for promoti...