In Brief
This Supreme Court judgment upheld convictions of ten terrorism suspects in a serial train bombing case from 1993. The Court validated confessions recorded under TADA, finding that when properly obtained with statutory safeguards, such confessions are admissible as substantive evidence against the accused and co-conspirators. The Court found sufficient corroboration through documentary evidence (passports, insured envelopes, hotel registers, reservation slips). However, convictions of four accused—A8, A9, A10, and A13—were set aside for lack of corroborating evidence beyond confessions of co-accused. The decision established that prior approval requirements under TADA section 20-A(1) are mandatory, and violations affect admissibility of confessions in related crimes."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.