2008 (11) TMI 750 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Admissibility and voluntariness of confessions recorded u/s 15 of TADA.
2. Compliance with procedural safeguards under TADA and the Indian Evidence Act.
3. Sufficiency of evidence to establish the charge of conspiracy and murder u/s 302 read with Section 120B IPC.
4. Corroboration of confessions with independent evidence.

Summary:
Admissibility and Voluntariness of Confessions Recorded u/s 15 of TADA:
The appellants contended that their confessions were not voluntary and were made under coercion and threats. The court noted that each appellant was informed that they were not bound to make a confession and that it could be used against them. The confessions were recorded by officers not lower in rank than a Superintendent of Police, as required by Section 15 of TADA, and were immediately sent to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The court found that the confessions were made voluntarily and complied with the procedural requirements under TADA.

Compliance with Procedural Safeguards under TADA and the Indian Evidence Act:
The appellants argued that their confessions should be inadmissible as they were recorded while in police custody and without legal assistance. The court held that the procedural safeguards under Section 15 of TADA and Rule 15 of the TADA Rules were strictly followed. The court emphasized that the guidelines laid down in Kartar Singh's case, although not incorporated into the Act or Rules, were substantially complied with.

Sufficiency of Evidence to Establish the Charge of Conspiracy and Murder u/s 302 read with Section 120B IPC:
The court analyzed the confessions and found that they provided a detailed account of the conspiracy, including the roles played by each appellant in the planning and execution of the murder of Rauf Valiullah. The confessions revealed the involvement of Abdul Latif and his gang in the conspiracy to eliminate Rauf Valiullah to prevent him from exposing their criminal activities. The court concluded that the prosecution had successfully established the charge of conspiracy and murder under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC.

Corroboration of Confessions with Independent Evidence:
The court found that the prosecution had produced sufficient corroborative evidence to support the confessions. Witnesses provided detailed accounts of the purchase and use of vehicles involved in the crime, the movements of the appellants, and the identification of the appellants in test identification parades. The court held that the confessions, corroborated by independent evidence, were sufficient to sustain the conviction of the appellants.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's judgment, finding the appellants guilty of conspiracy and murder under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC. The appeals were dismissed, and the court confirmed the sentences imposed by the trial court.