1995 (9) TMI 373 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Conviction under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of TADA, compliance with Rule 15 of TADA Rules for sending confessional statements, examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., reliance on the deposition of an interested witness, language of confessional statements, reliance on confessional statements without corroboration.

Conviction under Section 120B of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of TADA:
The appellants were convicted under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of TADA. The prosecution case involved the accused opening fire at the victim's house, resulting in injuries and death. The confessional statements made by the accused were considered voluntary by the Superintendent of Police. The Designated Court found the prosecution case proved based on the evidence presented and convicted the accused accordingly.

Compliance with Rule 15 of TADA Rules for sending confessional statements:
The defense argued that the confessional statements were not sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate as required by Rule 15 of TADA Rules. However, the confessional statements were promptly sent directly to the designated court by the Superintendent of Police. The court held that the rule regarding transmission of confessional statements was directory, not mandatory, and the failure to send them to the Chief Judicial Magistrate did not vitiate the trial.

Examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C.:
The defense contended that the accused were not specifically questioned about their confessional statements during examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., causing prejudice. The court disagreed, stating that the gist of the confessional statements was put to the accused during examination, and they were aware of the statements being relied upon by the prosecution.

Reliance on the deposition of an interested witness:
The defense challenged the deposition of the victim's father, stating he was an interested witness. The court held that being an injured witness, his testimony was credible, especially when corroborated by the confessional statements of the accused. The court emphasized that the quality and intrinsic worth of evidence should be considered, and being a relation does not render a witness incompetent.

Language of confessional statements:
The defense argued that the accused did not understand Hindi, in which the confessional statements were recorded. However, the court noted that the accused did not raise objections during recording or examination. The court rejected the claim that the accused could not follow Hindi, as they answered questions during examination without difficulty.

Reliance on confessional statements without corroboration:
The defense contended that reliance on confessional statements without corroboration was improper. The court held that the confessions were proved by the Superintendent of Police and partially corroborated by other evidence. The court rejected the defense's claim of fabrication and found the confessional statements admissible and reliable for conviction.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant not on bail was ordered to be taken into custody to serve the sentence. The court found no reason to overturn the conviction based on the issues raised by the defense, upholding the Designated Court's decision.