Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 18
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 526 of 2001
PETITIONER:
Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Bhutto
RESPONDENT:
State of Gujarat
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/01/2005
BENCH:
CJI R.C.LAHOTI,B.N.AGRAWAL,H.K.SEMA,G.P.MATHUR & P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 545 OF 2001
Abdulwahab Abdulmajid Shaikh & Ors. \005\005 Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat \005.Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 665 OF 2001
Musa Khan @ Baba Khan \005Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat \005.Respondent
H.K.SEMA,J.
All these appeals are directed against the judgment and
order dated 19th March, 2001 passed by the Designated Court No.3
at Ahmedabad in Terrorist Case No.2 of 1997, Terrorist Case No. 33
of 1994 and Terrorist Case No. 16 of 1995. The two-Judge bench
before whom these appeals were posted for hearing referred the
matters to a three-Judge Bench by an order dated 24.9.2002. The
said Order reads as under:-
"The issue involved concerns the admissibility of a
confession in terms of Section 15 of the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 ( in short
"TADA ACT"). Consequently, therefore, the other
provisions as contained in Sections 12 and 18 have to be
read in order to assess the legislative intent therein.
This Court in State v. Nalini, 1999 (5) SCC 253, in
paragraphs 80 and 81 stated the law to be as below:-
"80. Section 12 of TADA enables the
Designated Court to jointly try, at the same
trial, any offence under TADA together with
any other offence "with which the accused
may be charged" as per the Code of Criminal
Procedure. Sub-section (2) thereof empowers
the Designated Court to convict the accused,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 18
in such a trial, of any offence "under any other
law" if it is found by such Designated Court in
such trial that the accused is found guilty of
such offence. If the accused is acquitted of
the offences under TADA in such a trial, but
convicted of the offence under any other law,
it does not mean that there was only a trial for
such other offence under any other law.
81.Section 15 of TADA enables the
confessional statement of an accused made
to a police officer specified therein to become
admissible "in the trial of such a person". It
means, if there was a trial of any offence
under TADA together with any other offence
under any other law, the admissibility of the
confessional statement would continue to hold
good even if the accused is acquitted under
TADA offences."
The view expressed above stands in unison with
view expressed in paragraphs 408 and 674 and same is
noticed as below:-
"408.As to whether any offence under Section 3 or
Section 4 of TADA is made out in the present case, we
will consider at subsequent stage of the judgment. In
view of the decision of this Court in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo
Case contention of Mr.Natarajan is rather correct.
However, it appears to us that while holding the
confession to be inadmissible in a trial when the accused
is acquitted of offences under Section 3 or Section 4 of
TADA, provisions of Section 12 of TADA were not taken
into consideration by this Court in the said judgment.
Section 12 reads as under:
"12.Power of Designated Courts with
respect to other offences. \026 (1) When trying
any offence, a Designated Court may also try
any other offence with which the accused
may, under the Code, be charged at the same
trial if the offence is connected with such other
offence.
(2) If, in the course of any trial under this
Act of any offence, it is found that the accused
person has committed any other offence
under this Act or any rule made thereunder or
under any other law, the Designated Court
may convict such person of such other
offence and pass any sentence authorised by
this Act or such rule or, as the case may be,
such other law, for the punishment thereof."
"674. Having regard to the provisions of Section 12 of the
TADA Act, the confession recorded under Section 15 will
be admissible in the trial of a person, co-accused, abettor
or conspirator for an offence under the TADA Act or the
rules made thereunder and such other offence with which
such a person may be charged at the same trial under the
provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code provided the
offence under the TADA Act or the rules made thereunder
is connected with such other offence."
We are, however, constrained to record our doubt
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 18
as regards the state of the law as declared by the 3-
Judge Bench of this Court in Nalini (supra).
The issue, therefore, is whether the confessional
statement would continue to hold good even if the
accused is acquitted under TADA offences and there is a
clear finding that TADA Act has been wrongly taken
recourse to or the confession loses its legal efficacy under
the Act and thus rendering itself to an ordinary
confessional statement before the Police under the
general law of the land. Nalini (supra) , however,
answers this as noticed above, in positive terms but we
have some doubts pertaining thereto since the entire
justice delivery system is dependent upon the concept of
fairness: It is the interest of justice which has a pre-
dominant role in the criminal jurisprudence of the country
\026 The hall-mark of justice is the requirement of the day
and the need of the hour. Once the Court comes to a
definite finding that invocation of TADA Act is wholly
unjustified or there is utter frivolity to implicate under
TADA, would it be justified that Section 15 would be made
applicable with equal force as in TADA cases to book the
offenders even under the general law of the land. There
is thus doubt as noticed above!!
On the wake of the aforesaid and having regard to
the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in
Pradip Chandra Parija v. Pramod Chandra Patnaik,
(2002) 1 SCC 1, we do feel it expedient to direct the
Registry for placing this matter before Hon’ble the Chief
Justice of India for constituting a 3-Judge Bench for the
purpose. It is ordered accordingly."
In turn, the three-Judge Bench by an order dated 9.3.2004 has
referred the matters to a five-Judge Bench. The order reads:-
"This matter has been referred to a 3-Judge Bench
doubting the correctness of the decision in State Vs.
Nalini, 1999 (5) SCC 253 as to admissibility of a
confession in terms of Section 15 of the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. It is stated
that there are similar provisions available even under
Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (POTA). If really the
question as posed by the 2-Judge Bench is to be
answered, it could only be done by a Bench of 5 Judges
as Nalini’s case (supra) has been decided by a bench of
three learned Judges. Therefore, this matter is referred to
5-Judge Bench. The Registry is directed to place the
papers before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for
appropriate orders."
This is how the matters have been placed before this Bench.
The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
(hereinafter referred to as the Act) is a piece of Legislation containing
30 Sections. Though miniature legislation, the Act tends to be very
harsh and drastic containing the stringent provisions to combat the
menace of terrorism which has taken an endemic form indulging in
wanton killings, arson, looting of properties and other heinous crimes
affecting human rights and individual liberty. The constitutionality of
the Act has been concluded by the Constitution Bench of this Court in
Kartar Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569. The validity
of Section 15 of the Act which would be relevant for the present
purpose has been held to be intra-virus the Constitution. In
paragraphs 217, 218, 220, 222, 236 and 243 it is said:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 18
"217. If the procedural law is oppressive and violates the
principle of just and fair trial offending Article 21 of the
Constitution and is discriminatory violating the equal
protection of laws offending Article 14 of the Constitution,
then Section 15 of TADA Act is to be struck down.
Therefore, it has become inevitably essential to examine
the classification of ’offenders’ and ’offences’ so as to
enable us in deciding whether Section 15 is violative of
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
218. The principle of legislative classification is an
accepted principle whereunder persons may be classified
into groups and such groups may differently be treated if
there is a reasonable basis for such difference or
distinction. The rule of differentiation is that in enacting
laws differentiating between different persons or things in
different circumstances which govern one set of persons
or objects such laws may not necessarily be the same as
those governing another set of persons or objects so that
the question of unequal treatment does not really arise
between persons governed by different conditions and
different set of circumstances.
220. Coming to the distinction made in TADA Act
grouping the terrorists and disruptionists as a separate
class of offenders from ordinary criminals under the
normal laws and the classification of the offences under
TADA Act as aggravated form of crimes distinguishable
from the ordinary crimes have to be tested and
determined as to whether this distinction and
classification are reasonable and valid within the term of
Article 14 of the Constitution. In order to consider the
question as to the reasonableness of the distinction and
classification, it is necessary to take into account the
objective for such distinction and classification which of
course need not be made with mathematical precision.
Suffice, if there is little or no difference between the
persons and the things which have been grouped
together and those left out of the groups, the classification
cannot be said to be a reasonable one. In making the
classification, various factors have to be taken into
consideration and examined as to whether such a
distinction or classification justifies the different treatment
and whether they subserve the object sought to be
achieved.
222. As pointed out supra, the persons who are to be
tried for offences specified under the provisions of TADA
Act are a distinct class of persons and the procedure
prescribed for trying them for the aggravated and
incensed nature of offences are under different
classification distinguishable from the ordinary criminals
and procedure. This distinction and classification of
grouping of the accused and the offences to be tried
under TADA are to achieve the meaningful purpose and
object of the Act as reflected from the preamble as well as
the ’Statement of Objects and Reasons’ about which we
have elaborately dealt with in the preceding part of this
judgment.
236. Keeping the above proposition, we have to decide
whether the provisions of Section 15 of the 1987 Act
(TADA) contravene Article 14. True, if the classification is
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 18
shown to be arbitrary and unreasonable and without any
substantial basis, the law would be contrary to the equal
protection of laws by Article 14.
243. The above decision, in our view, cannot be availed
of for striking down Section 15 of TADA Act because the
classification of ’offenders’ and ’offences’ to be tried by
the Designated Court under the TADA Act or by the
Special Courts under the Act of 1984, are not left to the
arbitrary and uncontrolled discretion of the Central
Government but the Act itself has made a delineated
classification of the offenders as terrorists and
disruptionists in the TADA Act and the terrorists under the
Special Courts Act, 1984 as well as the classification of
offences under both the Acts.
This Court also pointed out in paragraph 259 the procedural
safeguards to be followed by the police officer with regard to the
mode of recording the confession. It is then held in paragraph 260
(SCC p.681) as under:-
"260.For the foregoing discussion, we hold that Section
15 is not liable to be struck down since that section does
not offend either Article 14 or Article 21 of the
Constitution."
This Court, however, as a matter of abundant caution laid down
certain guidelines, so as to ensure that the confession obtained is not
tainted with any vice and then said in paragraph 263 (SCC p.682) as
under:-
"263.However, we would like to lay down following
guidelines so as to ensure that the confession obtained in
the pre-indictment interrogation by a police officer not
lower in rank than a Superintendent of Police is not
tainted with any vice but is in strict conformity with the
well-recognised and accepted aesthetic principles and
fundamental fairness:
(1) The confession should be recorded in a free
atmosphere in the same language in which the
person is examined and as narrated by him;
(2) The person from whom a confession has been
recorded under Section 15(1) of the Act, should be
produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
or the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom the
confession is required to be sent under Rule 15(5)
along with the original statement of confession,
written or recorded on mechanical device without
unreasonable delay;
(3) The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the Chief
Judicial Magistrate should scrupulously record the
statement, if any, made by the accused so
produced and get his signature and in case of any
complaint of torture, the person should be directed
to be produced for medical examination before a
Medical Officer not lower in rank than of an
Assistant Civil Surgeon;
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, no police officer below
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 18
the rank of an Assistant Commissioner of Police in
the Metropolitan cities and elsewhere of a Deputy
Superintendent of Police or a police officer of
equivalent rank, should investigate any offence
punishable under this Act of 1987.
This is necessary in view of the drastic
provisions of this Act. More so when the Prevention
of Corruption Act, 1988 under Section 17 and the
Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 under Section
13, authorise only a police officer of a specified rank
to investigate the offences under those specified
Acts.
(5) The police officer if he is seeking the custody of
any person for pre-indictment or pre-trial
interrogation from the judicial custody, must file an
affidavit sworn by him explaining the reason not
only for such custody but also for the delay, if any,
in seeking the police custody;
(6) In case, the person, taken for interrogation, on
receipt of the statutory warning that he is not bound
to make a confession and that if he does so, the
said statement may be used against him as
evidence, asserts his right to silence, the police
officer must respect his right of assertion without
making any compulsion to give a statement of
disclosure;
The Central Government may take note of these
guidelines and incorporate them by appropriate
amendments in the Act and the Rules.
The 1985 Act received the assent of the President on 23rd May
and came into force on 24th May, 1985. The preamble of this Act
reads that the special provisions of this Act were made "for the
prevention of, and for coping with, terrorist and disruptive activities
and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto".
(emphasis suppl
ied)
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act reads as
follows:-
"Prefatory Note \026 Statement of Objects and Reasons.-
Terrorists had been indulging in wanton killings, arson,
looting of properties and other heinous crimes mostly in
Punjab and Chandigarh. Since the 10th May, 1985, the
terrorists have expanded their activities to other parts of
the country, i.e. Delhi, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and
Rajasthan as a result of which several innocent lives have
been lost and many suffered serious injuries. In planting
of explosive devices in trains, buses and public places,
the object to terrorise, to create fear and panic in the
minds of citizens and to disrupt communal peace and
harmony is clearly discernible. This is a new and overt
phase of terrorism which requires to be taken serious
note of and dealt with effectively and expeditiously. The
alarming increase in disruptive activities is also a matter
of serious concern. "
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 18
As the Act of 1985 was due to expire on 23rd May 1987, the
President promulgated the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities
(Prevention) Ordinance, 1987 (2 of 1987) which came into force from
24th May 1987. The Ordinance was repealed by the enactment of
1987 (No.28 of 1987) which received the assent of the President on
3rd September 1987. However, the scheme of the special provisions
in the Act of 1985 and the Act of 1987 remains the same. The
scheme of the Act being, for the prevention of, and for coping with,
terrorist and disruptive activities and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto.
The 1987 Act was further amended by an Amending Act 43
of 1993. The Statement of Objects and Reasons to Amending Act
are as follows:-
"The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act,
1985 was enacted on 23rd May, 1985 in the background
of escalating terrorist activities in many parts of the
country. The Act came into force with effect from 24th
May, 1985 with the stipulation that it would remain valid
for a period of two years with effect from the date of its
commencement as it was hoped at that time that it would
be possible to control, the menace of terrorism in a period
of two years. Unfortunately, terrorist violence has
continued unabated, necessitating the Government to
periodically extend the Act on the due dates in 1987,
1989 and 1991. The life of the Act is now due to expire
on the 23rd May, 1993. The views of the State
Governments were obtained while processing these
extensions and most of them had recommended
extension of the Act.
2. Terrorism which was initially confined to the States of
Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir and North East has spread
its tentacles to the States of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya
Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Haryana,
Delhi, Gujarat and West Bengal. Apart from this, the
sophisticated weapons, remote control devices, rocket
launchers, professional training and international
involvement have added a new and disturbing
dimension to the problem.
3. The menace of terrorism has also been a matter of
international concern. Recently, we have entered into an
agreement with the United Kingdom for mutual
assistance in the investigation and prosecution of
terrorist crime and the tracing, restraint and confiscation
of the proceeds and instruments of crime and terrorist
funds. This agreement is particularly useful in dealing
with terrorism inspired from abroad.
4. Keeping in view the above considerations, it is proposed
to amplify some of the existing provisions so as to also
concretize the agreement signed recently with the
United Kingdom for mutual assistance in investigation
and prosecution of terrorists crime and the tracing,
restraint and confiscation of the proceeds and
instruments of crime and terrorist funds and to extend
the Act for a further period of two years up to 23rd May,
1995.
5. The present Bill seeks to achieve the above mentioned
objects."
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 18
Thus, this type of extra ordinary laws are made to contain the
extraordinary situation by providing harsh, drastic and stringent
provisions, prescribing special procedure, departing from the
procedure prescribed under the ordinary procedural law for the
reasons that the prevalent ordinary procedural law was found to be
inadequate and not sufficiently effective to deal with the offenders
indulging in terrorist and disruptive activities. The preambles and
statements of objects and reasons as referred to above are
manifestly evident that such extra-ordinary Act was made to deal with
extra-ordinary situation for the prevention of, and for coping with,
terrorist and disruptive activities and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto.
The term ’terrorism’ has not been defined under the Act. This
Court in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra
(1994) 4 SCC 602 held in paragraph 7 (SCC p. 618) as under:-
"7."Terrorism’ is one of the manifestations of increased
lawlessness and cult of violence. Violence and crime
constitute a threat to an established order and are a revolt
against a civilised society. ’Terrorism’ has not been
defined under TADA nor is it possible to give a precise
definition of ’terrorism’ or lay down what constitutes
’terrorism’. It may be possible to describe it as use of
violence when its most important result is not merely the
physical and mental damage of the victim but the
prolonged psychological effect it produces or has the
potential of producing on the society as a whole. There
may be death, injury, or destruction of property or even
deprivation of individual liberty in the process but the
extent and reach of the intended terrorist activity travels
beyond the effect of an ordinary crime capable of being
punished under the ordinary penal law of the land and its
main objective is to overawe the Government or disturb
harmony of the society or "terrorise" people and the
society and not only those directly assaulted, with a view
to disturb even tempo, peace and tranquility of the society
and create a sense of fear and insecurity. A ’terrorist’
activity does not merely arise by causing disturbance of
law and order or of public order. The fall out of the
intended activity must be such that it travels beyond the
capacity of the ordinary law enforcement agencies to
tackle it under the ordinary penal law. Experience has
shown us that ’terrorism’ is generally an attempt to
acquire or maintain power or control by intimidation and
causing fear and helplessness in the minds of the people
at large or any section thereof and is a totally abnormal
phenomenon. What distinguishes ’terrorism’ from other
forms of violence, therefore, appears to be the deliberate
and systematic use of coercive intimidation. More often
than not, a hardened criminal today takes advantage of
the situation and by wearing the cloak of ’terrorism’, aims
to achieve for himself acceptability and respectability in
the society because unfortunately in the States affected
by militancy, a ’terrorist’ is projected as a hero by his
group and often even by the misguided youth. It is
therefore, essential to treat such a criminal and deal with
him differently than an ordinary criminal capable of being
tried by the ordinary courts under the penal law of the
land. Even though the crime committed by a ’terrorist’
and an ordinary criminal would be overlapping to an
extent but then it is not the intention of the Legislature that
every criminal should be tried under TADA, where the fall
out of his activity does not extend beyond the normal
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 18
frontiers of the ordinary criminal activity. Every ’terrorist’
may be a criminal but every criminal cannot be given the
label of a ’terrorist’ only to set in motion the more stringent
provisions of TADA. The criminal activity in order to
invoke TADA must be committed with the requisite
intention as contemplated by Section 3(1) of the Act by
use of such weapons as have been enumerated in
Section 3(1) and which cause or are likely to result in the
offences as mentioned in the said section."
As already noticed, the Act provides harsh and stringent
provisions aimed at to achieve the statement of objects and reasons
for the prevention of, and for coping with, terrorist and disruptive
activities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
The more stringent the Law, the less is the discretion of the
Court. Stringent laws are made for the purpose to achieve its
objectives. This being the intendment of the legislature the duty of
the court is to see that the intention of the legislature is not frustrated.
If there is any doubt or ambiguity in the statutes, the rule of purposive
construction should be taken recourse to, to achieve the objectives.
(See Swedish Match AB & Anr. vs. Securities & Exchange
Board, India & Anr. (2004) 7 Scale 158 para 84 at p. 176)
Before we proceed further, we may at this stage, notice a few
decisions of this Court on the subject. In the case of Bilal Ahmed
Kaloo Vs. State of A.P. (1997) 7 SCC 431 the two-Judge Bench of
this Court held in paragraph 5 ( SCC p.434 ) as under:-
"5. While dealing with the offences of which the appellant
was convicted there is no question of looking into the
confessional statement attributed to him, much less
relying on it since he was acquitted of all offences under
TADA. Any confession made to a police officer is
inadmissible in evidence as for these offences and hence
it is fairly conceded that the said ban would not wane off
in respect of offences under the Penal Code merely
because the trial was held by the Designated Court for
offences under TADA as well. Hence the case against
him would stand or fall depending on the other evidence."
This decision was rendered on 6th August, 1997. On the same day
another decision by the same Bench was rendered in the case of
Rambhai Nathabhai Gadhvi Vs. State of Gujarat, (1997) 7 SCC
744 where it was pointed out in paragraph 18 (SCC p.751) as under:
"18. It is obvious that power of the Designated Court to
charge the accused with any offence other than TADA
offences can be exercised only in a trial conducted for
any offence under TADA. When trial for offence under
TADA could not have been held by the Designated Court
for want of valid sanction envisaged in Section 20-A(2)
the consequence is that no valid trial could have been
held by that court into any offence under the Arms Act
also. It is clear that a Designated Court has no
independent power to try any other offence. Therefore,
no conviction under Section 25 of the Arms Act is
possible on the materials collected by the Designated
Court in the present case. "
It will be noticed that in both the judgments provisions of Section 12
of the Act have not been noticed. The decision rendered in Bilal
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 18
Ahmed’s case was followed in Gurprit Singh Vs. State of Punjab
(2002) 10 SCC 201.
The decision rendered in Bilal Ahmed’s case was noticed by
a three-Judge Bench of this Court in State Vs. Nalini (1999) 5 SCC
253. In Nalini’s case the Bench reconsidered the decision in Bilal
Ahmed’s case and overruled the decision in Bilal Ahmed’s case.
However, the decisions in Rambhai’s case and Gurprit Singh’s
case have not been noticed in Nalini’s case. In view of the decision
in Nalini’s case the decision rendered by a two-Judge Bench in
Rambahi’s and Gurprit Singh’s case are per incuriam.
The primary question referred to this Bench for determination
is, as to whether the confessional statement duly recorded under
Section 15 of TADA would continue to remain admissible as for the
offences under any other law which were tried along with TADA
offences under Section 12 of the Act, notwithstanding the fact that the
accused was acquitted of offences under TADA in the said trial.
The questions posed before us for the termination are no
more res integra. In our view, the same have been set at rest by
the three-Judge Bench decision rendered in Nalini (supra). The
rigours of Sections 12 and 15 were considered in Nalini’s case and
rendered a finding in paragraphs 80, 81 and 82 (SCC p.304) as
under:-
"80.Section 12 of TADA enables the
Designated Court to jointly try, at the same
trial, any offence under TADA together with
any other offence "with which the accused
may be charged" as per the Code of Criminal
Procedure. Sub-section (2) thereof empowers
the Designated Court to convict the accused,
in such a trial, of any offence "under any other
law" if it is found by such Designated Court in
such trial that the accused is found guilty of
such offence. If the accused is acquitted of
the offences under TADA in such a trial, but
convicted of the offence under any other law,
it does not mean that there was only a trial for
such other offence under any other law.
81.Section 15 of TADA enables the
confessional statement of an accused made
to a police officer specified therein to become
admissible "in the trial of such a person". It
means, if there was a trial of any offence
under TADA together with any other offence
under any other law, the admissibility of the
confessional statement would continue to hold
good even if the accused is acquitted under
TADA offences."
(emphasis supplied)
82. The aforesaid implications of Section 12
vis-‘-vis Section 15 of TADA have not been
adverted to in Bilal Ahmed case. Hence the
observations therein (at SCC p.434, para 5)
that
"while dealing with the offences of
which the appellant was convicted
there is no question of looking into
the confessional statement
attributed to him, much less
relying on it since he was
acquitted of all offences under
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 18
TADA"
cannot be followed by us. The correct
position is that the confessional statement
duly recorded under Section 15 of TADA
would continue to remain admissible as for the
other offences under any other law which too
were tried along with TADA offences, no
matter that the accused was acquitted of
offences under TADA in that trial."
(emphasis supplied)
We are in respectful agreement with the findings recorded by a three-
Judge Bench in Nalini’s case.
S.S.M.Quadri,J in his concurring judgment held in
paragraphs 674 and 675 at SCC p.571 as under:-
"674.Having regard to the provisions of Section 12 of the
TADA Act, the confession recorded under Section 15 will
be admissible in the trial of a person, co-accused, abettor
or conspirator for an offence under the TADA Act or the
rules made thereunder and such other offence with which
such a person may be charged at the same trial under the
provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code provided the
offence under the TADA Act or the rules made thereunder
is connected with such other offence.
675. An analysis of sub-section (1) Section 15 shows that
it has two limbs. The first limb bars application of
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the
Indian Evidence Act to a confession made by a person
before a police officer not lower in rank than a
Superintendent of Police and recorded by him in any of
the modes noted in the section. The second limb makes
such a confession admissible, dehors the provisions of
the Evidence Act in the trial of such person or co-
accused, abettor or conspirator for an offence under the
TADA Act or rules made thereunder provided the co-
accused, abettor or conspirator is charged and tried in the
same case together with the accused. The import of
Section 15 (1) is that insofar as the provisions of CrPC
and the Evidence Act come in conflict with either
recording of a confession of a person by a police officer of
the rank mentioned therein, in any of the modes specified
in the section, or its admissibility at the trial, they will have
to yield to the provision of Section 15(1) of the TADA Act
as it is given overriding effect."
It was also pointed out in paragraph 704 at SCC p.580 that a
confession of an accused under Section 15 of the TADA Act is
substantive evidence against the co-accused, abettor or conspirator
jointly tried with the accused.
Before we proceed to consider the rigours of Sections 15 and
12 we may at this stage point out that it is a trite law that the
jurisdiction of the Court to interpret a statute can be invoked only in
case of ambiguity. The Court cannot enlarge the scope of legislation
or intention when the language of the statute is plain and
unambiguous. Narrow and pedantic construction may not always be
given effect to. Courts should avoid a construction which would
reduce the legislation to futility. It is also well settled that every
statute is to be interpreted without any violence to its language. It is
also trite that when an expression is capable of more than one
meaning, the court would attempt to resolve the ambiguity in a
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 18
manner consistent with the purpose of the provision, having regard to
the consequences of the alternative constructions. In this connection,
we may notice few decisions of this Court.
In Nasiruddin Vs. Sita Ram Agarwal, (2003) 2 SCC 577,
the three judge-Bench of this Court pointed out in paragraphs 35 and
37 ( SCC p. 588) and (SCC p. 589) as under:-
"35.In a case where the statutory provision is plain and
unambiguous, the court shall not interpret the same in a
different manner, only because of harsh consequences
arising therefrom."
"37. The Court’s jurisdiction to interpret a statue can be
invoked when the same is ambiguous. It is well known
that in a given case the court can iron out the fabric but it
cannot change the texture of the fabric. It cannot enlarge
the scope of legislation or intention when the language of
the provision is plain and unambiguous. It cannot add or
subtract words to a statue or read something into it which
is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. It is
also necessary to determine that there exists a
presumption that the legislature has not used any
superfluous words. It is well settled that the real intention
of the legislation must be gathered from the language
used. It may be true that use of the expression "shall or
may" is not decisive for arriving at a finding as to whether
the statue is directory or mandatory. But the intention of
the legislature must be found out from the scheme of the
Act. It is also equally well settled that when negative
words are used the courts will presume that the intention
of the legislature was that the provisions are mandatory in
character."
(See also Mohan Kumar Singhania vs. Union of
India, 1992 Supp.(1) SCC 594 (SCC p.624) para 67)
In the case of Balram Kumawat vs. Union of India, 2003 (7)
SCC 628, the three-Judge Bench of this Court pointed out in
paragraph 23 at SCC p. 635 as under:-
"Furthermore, even in relation to a penal statute any
narrow and pedantic, literal and lexical construction may
not always be given effect to. The law would have to be
interpreted having regard to the subject-matter of the
offence and the object of the law it seeks to achieve. The
purpose of the law is not to allow the offender to sneak
out of the meshes of law. Criminal jurisprudence does
not say so."
and further in paragraph 30 at SCC p.638 it was pointed out as
under:-
"30. Yet again in Supdt. And Remembrancer of Legal
Affiars to Govt. of W.B. v. Abani Maity (1979) 4 SCC 85
the law is stated in the following terms: (SCC p.90, para
18)
"19{18}. Exposition ex visceribus actus
is a long-recognised rule of construction.
Words in a statue often take their meaning
from the context of the statute as a whole.
They are therefore, not to be construed in
isolation. For instance, the use of the word
’may’ would normally indicate that the
provision was not mandatory. But in the
context of a particular statute, this word may
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 18
connote a legislative imperative, particularly
when its construction in a permissive sense
would relegate it to the unenviable position, as
it were, ’of an in effectual angel beating its
wings in a luminous void in vain’. ’If the
choice is between two interpretations’, said
Viscount Simon, L.C. In Nokes v. Doncaster
Amalgamated Collieries, Ltd. (AC at p.1022)
’the narrower of which would fail to achieve the manifest
purpose of the legislation, we should avoid a construction
which would reduce the legislation to futility and should
rather accept the bolder construction based on the view
that Parliament would legislate only for the purpose of
bringing about an effective result’".
In the backdrop of referred decisions and keeping in view the
legislative intendment and scheme of the Act, we may now examine
rigours of Sections 15 and 12 of the Act.
Section 15 deals with certain confessions made to police
officers to be taken into consideration. It reads:-
(1) Notwithstanding anything in the Code or in the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), but subject to the
provisions of this section, a confession made by a person
before a police officer not lower in rank than a
Superintendent of Police and recorded by such police
officer either in writing or on any mechanical device like
cassettes, tapes or sound tracks from out of which
sounds or images can be reproduced, shall be admissible
in the trial of such person ( or co-accused, abettor or
conspirator ) for an offence under this Act or rules made
thereunder:
Provided that co-accused, abettor or conspirator is
charged and tried in the same case together with the
accused.
(2) The police officer shall, before recording any
confession under sub-section (1), explain to the person
making it that he is not bound to make a confession and
that, if he does so, it may be used as evidence against
him and such police officer shall not record any such
confession unless upon questioning the person making it,
he has reason to believe that it is being made voluntarily.
Rule 15 deals with the recording of confession made to police
officers. It reads:-
(1) A confession made by a person before a police officer
and recorded by such police officer under Section 15 of
the Act shall invariably be recorded in the language in
which such confession is made and if that is not
practicable, in the language used by such police officer
for official purposes or in the language of the Designated
Court and it shall form part of the record.
(2) the confession so recorded shall be shown, read or
played back to the person concerned and if he does not
understand the language in which it is recorded, it shall
be interpreted to him in a language which he understands
and he shall be at liberty to explain or add to his
confession.
(3) The confession shall, if it is in writing, be-
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 18
(a) signed by the person who makes the confession; and
(b) by the police officer who shall also certify under his
own hand that such confession was taken in his presence
and recorded by him and that the record contains a full
and true account of the confession made by the person
and such police officer shall make a memorandum at the
end of the confession to the following effect:-
"I have explained to (name) that he is not bound to
make a confession and that, if he does so, any confession
he may make may be used as evidence against him and I
believe that this confession was voluntarily made. It was
taken in my presence and hearing and recorded by me
and was read over to the person making it and admitted
by him to be correct, and it contains a full and true
account of the statement made by him.
Sd/- Police Officer.".
(4) Where the confession is recorded on any mechanical
device, the memorandum referred to in sub-rule (3) in so
far as it is applicable and a declaration made by the
person making the confession that the said confession
recorded on the mechanical device has been correctly
recorded in his presence shall also be recorded in the
mechanical device at the end of the confession.
(5) Every confession recorded under the said Section 15
shall be sent forthwith to the Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate having
jurisdiction over the area in which such confession has
been recorded and such Magistrate shall forward the
recorded confession so received to the Designated Court
which may take cognizance of the offence.
Section 12 deals with the power of Designated Courts
with respect to other offences. It reads:-
(1) When trying any offence, a Designated Court may
also try any other offence with which the accused may,
under the Code, be charged at the same trial if the
offence is connected with such other offence.
(emphasis supplied)
(2) If, in the course of any trial under this Act of any
offence, it is found that the accused person has
committed any other offence under this Act or any rule
made thereunder or under any other law, the Designated
Court may convict such person of such other offence and
pass any sentence authorised by this Act or such rule or,
as the case may be, such other laws, for the punishment
thereof.
On a cursory reading of both the Sections, it appears to us that
the language employed therein is plain and unambiguous. As
pointed out by this Court in Nalini’s case (supra) Section 15 consists
of two limbs. The first limb bars application of provisions of the Code
of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act to a confession
made by a person before a police officer not lower in rank than a
Superintendent of Police and recorded by him in any of the modes
noted in the Section. The second limb makes such a confession
admissible, dehors the provisions of the Evidence Act in the trial of
such person or co-accused, abettor or conspirator for an offence
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 18
under the TADA Act or rules made thereunder provided the co-
accused, abettor or conspirator is charged and tried in the same case
together with the accused as provided in Section 12 of the Act. It
was also pointed out that in the event Cr.P.C. and the Evidence Act
come in conflict with either recording of a confession of a person by a
police officer of the rank mentioned therein, in any of the modes
specified in the Section, or its admissibility at the trial, Section 15 of
the TADA Act will have a overriding effect over the Cr.P.C. and the
Evidence Act.
Counsel for the appellants strenuously urged that the words
"for an offence under this Act" employed in Section 15 suggest that
the confession recorded under Section 15 in the manner provided,
excludes the confession admissible in evidence if no offence under
TADA is made out. In other words, the confession recorded under
Section 15 in the manner provided excludes the confession
admissible in evidence insofar for the other offences are concerned.
Counsel also urged that the words, "but subject to provisions of this
Section" also suggest that the said provisions are confined only to the
TADA offences. We are unable to accept this contention. Section
15 of the TADA Act and Rules framed thereunder is a self-
contained code in itself, providing procedural safeguards and the
words, "but subject to the provisions of this Section" employed therein
would mean the procedural safeguards prescribed under the Section.
As already pointed out Section 15 has overriding effect over the
Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure Code, the only procedure to
be followed in recording confession is the procedure prescribed
under the provisions of Section 15 and Rules framed thereunder.
This would be the only intention of the Legislation while introducing
the words, "but subject to provisions of this section" in Section 15(1).
So far the words "for an offence under this Act" is concerned,
the word ’Act’ referred to in Section 15(1) is relatable to Section 12 of
the Act. Section 15 therefore has to be read together with Section
12.
By now it is well settled Principle of Law that no part of a
statute and no word of a statute can be construed in isolation.
Statutes have to be construed so that every word has a place and
everything is in its place. It is also trite that the statute or rules made
thereunder should be read as a whole and one provision should be
construed with reference to the other provision to make the provision
consistent with the object sought to be achieved.
In Reserve Bank of India v. Peerless General Finance and
Investment Co. Ltd. (1987) 1 SCC 424, this Court said: (SCC p.
450, para 33)
"33. Interpretation must depend on the text and the
context. They are the basis of interpretation. One may
well say if the text is the texture, context is what gives the
colour. Neither can be ignored. Both are important. That
interpretation is best which makes the textual
interpretation match the contextual. A statute is best
interpreted when we know why it was enacted. With this
knowledge, the statute must be read, first as a whole and
then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by
phrase and word by word. If a statute is looked at, in the
context of its enactment, with the glasses of the statute-
maker, provided by such context, its scheme, the
sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour
and appear different than when the statute is looked at
without the glasses provided by the context. With these
glasses we must look at the Act as a whole and discover
what each section, each clause, each phrase and each
word is meant and designed to say as to fit into the
scheme of the entire Act. No part of a statute and no
word of a statute can be construed in isolation. Statutes
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 18
have to be construed so that every word has a place and
everything is in its place."
(emphasis supplied)
In Anwar Hasan Khan v. Mohd. Shafi and Others (2001) 8
SCC 540, this Court held:
"8\005..It is a cardinal principle of construction of a statute
that effort should be made in construing its provisions by
avoiding a conflict and adopting a harmonious
construction. The statute or rules made thereunder
should be read as a whole and one provision should be
construed with reference to the other provision to make
the provision consistent with the object sought to be
achieved\005.."
Section 12 which empowers the Designated Court to try any
other offence with which the accused may be charged under the
Code at the same trial provided the offence is connected with such
other offence. This section has been brought to the statute book in
consonance with the preamble of the Act, which says, "for the
prevention of, and for coping with, terrorist and disruptive activities
and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto."
Therefore, Section 12 is introduced to take care of the matters
connected with or incidental to terrorist activities.
A conjoint reading of two sections as a whole, it leaves no
manner of doubt that one provision is to be construed with reference
to the other provision and vice versa so as to make the provision
consistent with the object sought to be achieved. The scheme and
object of the Act being the admissibility of the confession recorded
under Section 15 of the Act in the trial of a person or co-accused,
abettor or conspirator is charged and tried in the same case together
with the accused, as provided under Section 12 of the Act.
Counsel contends that Section 12 is only enabling provision
empowering the Designated Court to try and convict for the offences
committed under any other law along with the offences under the
TADA so as to avoid multiplicity of the Trial and does not empower
the Designated Court to try and convict for other offences, even if the
offences under the TADA are not made out. Does it mean,"Thou shalt
have teeth, but not bite". We think not. When the Courts have power
to try, it is implicit in it that they have the power to convict also. In the
present case sub-section 2 of Section 12 expressly empowered the
Designated Court to convict the accused person of such other
offence and pass any sentence authorised by the Act - if the offence
is connected with such other offence and - if it is found that the
accused person has committed any other offence.
Section 12(1) as quoted above authorises the Designated Court
to try offences under the TADA along with another offence with which
the accused may be charged under Cr.P.C. at the same trial. The
only embargo imposed on the exercise of the power is that the
offence under the TADA is connected with any other offence being
tried together. Further, Section 12(2) provides that the Designated
Court may convict the accused person of offence under that Act or
any rule made thereunder or under any other law and pass any
sentence authorised under that Act or the rules or under any other
law, as the case may be for the punishment thereof, if in the course of
any trial under the TADA the accused persons are found to have
committed any offence either under that Act or any rule or under any
other law.
The legislative intendment underlying Section 12(1) and (2) is
clearly discernable, to empower the Designated Court to try and
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 18
convict the accused for offences committed under any other law
along with offences committed under the Act, if the offence is
connected with such other offence. The language, "if the offence is
connected with such other offence" employed in Section 12(1) of the
Act has great significance. The necessary corollary is that once the
other offence is connected with the offence under the TADA and if the
accused is charged under the Code and tried together in the same
trial, the Designated Court is empowered to convict the accused for
the offence under any other law, notwithstanding the fact that no
offence under TADA is made out. This could be the only intendment
of the legislature. To hold otherwise, would amount to rewrite or
recast legislation and read something into it which is not there.
Counsel also urged that the rigours of Section 12 is
discriminatory and attract the wrath of Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution as it empowers the Designated Court to try and convict
the accused for the offences committed under any other law along
with the offences committed under the TADA thereby depriving the
rights available to the accused under the ordinary law. In our opinion,
this contention is misconceived. It is trite law that Article 14 prohibits
discrimination, but allows reasonable classification based on
intelligible differentia, having nexus with the object sought to be
achieved. The object sought to be achieved by introducing Section
12 is to take care of the offence connected with or incidental to
terrorist activities. The other offence being connected and
inextricably inter-twined with the Terrorist Act. As already pointed
out in Kartar Singh (supra) the Trial under TADA is a departure from
the ordinary law. The persons who are tried for offences specified
under the provisions of TADA are a distinct class of persons and the
procedure prescribed for trying them for the aggravated and incensed
nature of offences are under different classification distinguishable
from the ordinary criminals and procedure. This distinction and
classification of grouping of the accused and the offences to be tried
under TADA are to achieve the meaningful purpose and object of the
Act as reflected from the preamble as well as the statement of objects
and reasons.
The Act, as noticed above, is a special provision for special
purpose. It is a departure from the ordinary procedural law. Plea of
discriminatory treatment for want of availability of ordinary procedural
law would not be available.
For the reasons aforestated, we are of the view that the
decision in Nalini’s case has laid down correct law and we hold that
the confessional statement duly recorded under Section 15 of TADA
and Rules framed thereunder would continue to remain admissible for
the offences under any other law which were tried along with TADA
offences under Section 12 of the Act, notwithstanding that the
accused was acquitted of offences under TADA in the same trial.
The other leg of the submission is rigours of Section 18 of the
Act. Section 18 deals with the power to transfer cases to regular
courts. It reads:-
"Where, after taking cognizance of any offence, a
Designated Court is of opinion that the offence is not
triable by it, it shall, notwithstanding that it has no
jurisdiction to try such offence, transfer the case for the
trial of such offence to any court having jurisdiction under
the Code and the court to which the case is transferred
may proceed with the trial of the offence as if it had taken
cognizance of the offence."
(emphasis supplied)
It is contended that the words,"after taking cognizance"
employed in Section 18 of the Act would include any stage of trial
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 18
including the stage when the judgment is to be delivered. This
submission is also misconceived. If it ought to have been the
intention of the legislature they could have said so. The legislature
deliberately uses the words "after taking cognizance of any offence"
to mean that Section 18 would be attracted only at the stage where
the Designated Court takes cognizance of offence i.e., after the
investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed. The provisions of
Section 209 Cr.P.C. to which the counsel for the appellants sought to
rely are not in pari materia with Section 18. In Section 209 Cr.P.C.
the words "after taking cognizance" are absent conspicuously.
Section 18 is a filtered provision. The Section is attracted only at a
stage the Designated Court takes cognizance of offence. It is at the
stage of taking cognizance, the Designated Court is expected to scan
the documents and evidence collected therewith, if the Designated
Court is of opinion that the offence is not triable by it, it shall, then
notwithstanding that it has no jurisdiction to try such offence, transfer
the case for the trial of such offence to any court having jurisdiction
under the Code and the Court to which the case is transferred may
proceed with the trial of the offence as if it had taken cognizance of
the offence. In our view, there is no ambiguity in the language used
in Section 18. If the submissions of the counsel for the appellant are
accepted, it would amount to reading something into the statute
which is not there.
Having said so, we also notice the note of caution of this
Court in Kartar Singh (supra) in paragraph 352 ( SCC p.707) as
under:-
"352. It is true that on many occasions, we have come
across cases wherein the prosecution unjustifiably
invokes the provisions of the TADA Act with an oblique
motive of depriving the accused persons from getting bail
and in some occasions when the courts are inclined to
grant bail in cases registered under ordinary criminal law,
the investigating officers in order to circumvent the
authority of the courts invoke the provisions of the TADA
Act. This kind of invocation of the provisions of TADA in
cases, the facts of which do not warrant, is nothing but
sheer misuse and abuse of the Act by the police. Unless,
the public prosecutors rise to the occasion and discharge
their onerous responsibilities keeping in mind that they
are prosecutors on behalf of the public but not the police
and unless the Presiding Officers of the Designated
Courts discharge their judicial functions keeping in view
the fundamental rights particularly of the personal right
and liberty of every citizen as enshrined in the
Constitution to which they have been assigned the role of
sentinel on the qui vive, it cannot be said that the
provisions of TADA Act are enforced effectively
inconsonance with the legislative intendment."
(emphasis supplied)
In our view the above observation is eloquently sufficient to
caution police officials as well as the Presiding Officers of the
Designated Courts from misusing the Act and to enforce the Act
effectively and inconsonance with the legislative intendment which
would mean after the application of mind. We reiterate the same.
For the reasons aforestated, the reference is answered in the
above terms. The appeals shall now be listed before a regular Bench
for hearing.