), 2011 (2 )ADJ700 , 2011 (99 )AIC126 (S.C. ), AIR2011 SC 957 , 2011 (72 ) ACC 921 , I (2011 )CCR382 (SC ), 2011 (1 ) CG.L.R.W. 258 , 2011 (2 )CLJ(SC )9 , 2011 CriLJ1455 , 2011 (1 )Crimes268 (SC ), 2011 (2 )ECrN (NULL ) 594 , (2011 )1 GLR845 (SC ), 2011 INSC 98 , 2011 (2 )JCC977 , 2011 (1 )JCC416 (SC ), [2011 (2 )JCR170 (SC )], 2011 (2 )KCCRSN141 , 2011 (I )OLR(SC )1057 , 2011 (1 )RCR(Criminal)882 , 2011 (2 )SCALE210 , (2011 )3 SCC377 , (2011 )1 SCC(Cri)855 , [2011 ]2 SCR506 , ,MANU/SC/0096/2011
Markandey Katju#Gyan Sudha Misra#270SC3050Judgment/OrderACR#ADJ#AIC#AIR#Allahabad Criminal Cases#CCR#CG.L.R.W#CLJ#CriLJ#Crimes#ECrN#Gujarat Law Reporter#INSC#JCC#JCC#JCR#KCCR (SN)#MANU#OLR#RCR (Criminal)#SCALE#SCC#SCC(Criminal)#SCRSUPREME COURT OF INDIA2012-9-24Membership in a banned organisation,Sedition,Offences Against The State,Purposive Interpretation; [Heydon's Rule/Mischief Rule],Rule of Constructions,Title and extent of operation of the Code,Introduction,Confession to police officer not to be proved,Protection of Certain rights Regarding Freedom of Speech, etc.,Right to Freedom,Fundamental Rights,Law of Evidence,Constitution of India,Indian Penal Code15603,86761,86747,16916,16918 -->
MANU/SC/0096/2011
True Court CopyTM English
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 889 of 2007
Decided On: 03.02.2011
Appellants: Arup Bhuyan Vs. Respondent: State of Assam ..(+)
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra ORDER
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Designated Court, Assam at Guwahati dated 28.03.2007 passed in TADA Sessions Case No. 13 of 1991.
3. The facts have already been set out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.
4. The Appellant is alleged to be a member of ULFA and the only material produced by the prosecution against the Appellant is his alleged confessional statement made before the Superintendent of Police in which he is said to have identified the house of the deceased.
5. Confession to a police officer is inadmissible vide Section 25 of the Evidence Act, but it is admissible in TADA cases vide Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987.
6. Confession is a very weak kind of evidence. As is well known, the wide spread and rampant practice in the police in India is to use third degree methods for extracting confessions from the alleged accused. Hence, the courts have to be cautious in accepting confessions made to the police by the alleged accused.
7. Unfortunately, the police in our country are not trained in scientific investigation (as is the police in Western countries) nor are they provided the technical equipments for scientific investigation, hence to obtain a conviction they often rely on the easy short cut of procuring a confession under torture.
8. Torture is such a terrible thing that when a person is under torture he will confess to almost any crime. Even Joan of Arc confessed to be a witch under torture. Hence, where the