Judgment

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, in such a trial, of any offence “under any ot