Confession is a weak tool: SC
New Delhi, Feb. 5: Even though a confession by an accused under the repealed anti-terror law TADA is recognised as independent evidence, the Supreme Court has given a new interpretation to its evidentiary value, terming it a “very weak evidence” because the police is known for extracting confessional statements by using third degree methods.
“Torture is such a terrible thing that when a person is under torture, he will confess to almost any crime. Even Joan of Arc confessed to be a witch under torture. Hence, where the prosecution case mainly rests on the confessional statement made to the police by the alleged accused, in the absence of corroborative material, the courts must be hesitant before they accept such extra-judicial confessional statements,” Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra ruled.
The ruling came on an appeal of Arup Bhuyan, convicted by a Guwahati special TADA court in 2007 in an alleged terror attack case, describing him a member of banned militant outfit Ulfa.
The top court pointed out that Mr Bhuyan had retracted his confession during the trial in spite of the prosecutor alleging that Mr Bhuyan had admitted to his role in the Ulfa attack to the SP, and in the lack of corroborative evidence, there were no grounds to convict the accused merely on the basis of an “extra-judicial confessional statement.”
Post new comment