2013 (3) TMI 622 - SC - Indian Laws

If the confessional statement is properly recorded satisfying the mandatory provision of Section 15 of TADA and the Rules made thereunder, and if the same is found by the court as having been made voluntarily and truthfully then the said confession is sufficient to base conviction on the maker of the confession? Whether the death sentence be commuted into life imprisonment for rest of the appellants convicted?

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation and application of Section 353 and Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
2. Definition and requirements of a "judgment" under CrPC.
3. Admissibility and reliability of confessions under TADA.
4. Grant of pardon under Section 306 of CrPC.
5. Validity and evidentiary value of panchnama and recoveries.
6. Evidence of conspiracy and participation in terrorist acts.
7. Sentencing and application of the death penalty.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Interpretation and Application of Section 353 and Section 235(2) of CrPC:
The appellants contended that the trial judge failed to provide the complete judgment, which is mandatory under Section 353 of CrPC. They argued that the absence of a full judgment, including reasoning and discussion, invalidates the conviction and sentence. The court emphasized that Section 353 requires the judgment to be pronounced in open court and signed by the judge. The court also highlighted that under Section 235(2) of CrPC, the accused must be heard on the question of sentence, and the judgment should include reasons for the sentence awarded.

2. Definition and Requirements of a "Judgment" under CrPC:
The court referred to various precedents to define "judgment" as the final decision of the court, which must be pronounced in open court. It must contain points for determination, the decision thereon, and reasons for such decision. The court reiterated that a judgment is complete only when it includes the sentence and is signed by the judge. The court held that the judgment in the present case was pronounced in compliance with Section 353(1)(c) of CrPC and included all necessary components.

3. Admissibility and Reliability of Confessions under TADA:
The court examined the admissibility of confessions under Section 15 of TADA, which allows confessions made to a police officer not lower in rank than a Superintendent of Police to be admissible. The court noted that such confessions are substantive evidence against the maker and co-accused. The court emphasized that the confessions must be voluntary and truthful, and minor procedural irregularities do not render them inadmissible. The court found that the confessions in the present case were recorded in compliance with TADA provisions and were reliable.

4. Grant of Pardon under Section 306 of CrPC:
The appellants challenged the grant of pardon to an approver, arguing that TADA does not specifically provide for it. The court held that the power to grant pardon under Section 306 of CrPC applies to cases under TADA, as there is no specific exclusion in TADA. The court emphasized that the object of Section 306 is to secure evidence from an accomplice to bring home the offence. The court found that the grant of pardon in the present case was in compliance with legal provisions and upheld its validity.

5. Validity and Evidentiary Value of Panchnama and Recoveries:
The appellants contended that the recoveries were inadmissible due to procedural lapses in the panchnama. The court outlined the requirements for a valid panchnama, including the presence of independent witnesses and proper documentation. The court noted that minor discrepancies do not invalidate the entire panchnama and that the evidence of police witnesses can be relied upon if found trustworthy. The court found that the recoveries in the present case were conducted in compliance with legal requirements and were admissible.

6. Evidence of Conspiracy and Participation in Terrorist Acts:
The court examined the evidence of conspiracy, including confessions, testimonies of prosecution witnesses, and documentary evidence. The court found that the appellants actively participated in the conspiracy, attended meetings, received training in handling arms and explosives, and executed the terrorist acts. The court held that the prosecution had established the charges of conspiracy and participation in terrorist acts beyond reasonable doubt.

7. Sentencing and Application of the Death Penalty:
The court considered the appropriateness of the death penalty for the appellants. The court emphasized that the death penalty should be awarded in the rarest of rare cases and after considering mitigating and aggravating circumstances. The court found that the appellants' actions were premeditated, involved large-scale planning, and resulted in significant loss of life and property. The court upheld the death penalty, finding it justified in the present case.

Conclusion:
The court upheld the convictions and sentences of the appellants, including the death penalty, finding that the prosecution had established the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural requirements and the reliability of evidence in securing convictions in cases involving serious offences like terrorism.

← Previous Next →