Appellants: Arup Bhuyan

Vs.
Respondent: State of Assam
AIR 2011 SC 957
Concept
Facts
Issues
Judgment
Analysis

The term confession is not defined in Indian
Evidence Act ,Lord Atkin define confession as
A confession must either admit in terms the
offence or at any rate all the facts which
constitute offence
According to Section 25 of Indian evidence Act
no confession made to police officer ,shall be
proved as against the person making it
The Appellant
alleged to be a member of ULFA and the only
material produced by the prosecution against
the Appellant is his alleged confessional
statement made before the Superintendent of
Police in which he is said to have identified the
house of the deceased
Confession to a police officer is inadmissible
vide Section 25 of the Evidence Act, but it is
admissible in TADA cases vide Section 15 of
the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1987
prosecution case mainly relies on the alleged
confessional statement of the Appellant made
before the Superintendent of Police, which is an
extra-judicial confession and there is absence of
corroborative material therefore issue is
Whether it will be safe to convict the accused on
the basis of alleged confessional statement.
2. Whether accused can be convicted under
section 3(5) of TADA Act which make mere
membership to illegal organization criminal
Section 3(5) cannot be read literally otherwise it
will violate Articles 19 and 21 of the
Constitution. It has to be read in the light of our
observations made above. Hence, mere
membership of a banned organisation will not
make a person a criminal unless he resorts to
violence or incites people to violence or creates
public disorder by violence or incitement to
violence
this Court had directed that the Appellant be
released on bail on his furnishing adequate
security to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Security furnished by the Appellant in
pursuance of Order dated 29.10.2007 shall
stand discharged
It was take over from other judgments and court
has taken very apt and reasonable stand
Confession to a police officer is inadmissible vide
Section 25 of the Evidence Act, but it is admissible
in TADA cases vide Section 15 of the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
As is well known, the wide spread and rampant
practice in the police in India is to use third degree
methods for extracting confessions from the
alleged accused. Hence, the courts have to be
cautious in accepting confessions made to the
police by the alleged accused
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

15. Certain confessions made to police officers to be taken into
consideration.- (1) Nothwithstanding anything in the Code or in the
Indian Evidence Act, 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

6[or co-accused, abettor or
conspirator] for an offence under this Act or rules made thereunder:

7
[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.