PRAKASH KUMAR ALIAS PRAKASH BHUTTO vs State Of Gujarat

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2004 Supreme(SC) 275

Supreme Court Of India
PRAKASH KUMAR ALIAS PRAKASH BHUTTO
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
Decided on March 9, 2004

Headnote:
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, Section 15 - Confession - Admissibility of- Correctness of the decision in State v. Nalini, (1999) 5 SCC 253 as to admissibility of a confession in terms of Section 15, was referred to a three Judges Bench- Similar provision under Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, State v. Nalini, 1999(5) SCC 253 doubted and referred to the three-Judge Bench - Since Nalini case was decided by a three-Judge Bench, matter referred toa five-Judge Bench. [Para 1]

( 1 ) THIS matter has been referred to a three-Judge Bench doubting the correctness of the decision in State v. Nalini as to admissibility of a confession in terms of Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. It is stated that there are similar provisions available even under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA ). If really the question as posed by the two-Judge Bench is to be answered, it could only be done by a bench of five Judges as Nalini case has been decided by a Bench of three learned Judges. Therefore, this matter is referred to a five-Judge Bench. The registry is directed to place the papers before the Honble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders. Court Masters

Click Here to Read the rest of this document