In Brief
The State of Gujarat appealed against the acquittal of three respondents charged under TADA and other laws for illegal possession of foreign firearms and wireless sets. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The Court held that prior sanction under Section 20-A(2) of TADA is mandatory for the Designated Court's jurisdiction. Both sanction orders were invalid because they merely recorded permission to apply TADA sections without demonstrating the sanctioning authority's conscious consideration of whether specific TADA offences were actually committed. Since no valid sanction existed, the Designated Court could not take cognizance of TADA offences. Additionally, confessional statements recorded under TADA were inadmissible for trials under other laws, and the search and seizure evidence contained fatal deficiencies. The acquittal was therefore upheld."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.