D. S. R. VARMA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned senior Counsel, representing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, as well as learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.

( 2 ) APPELLANT is accused No. 8 in the sessions Case.

( 3 ) THIS Criminal Appeal is preferred by the Appellant aggrieved by the charges framed against him under Sections 3 (3), 20, 21 and 22 of the Prevention of Terrorism act, 2002 (Act 15 of 2002) (for short 'the pota') by the Additional Metropolitan sessions Judge for the trial of Jubilee Hills Car bomb Blast Case-cum-Additional Family court, Hyderabad, in Sessions Case No. 74 of 2004.

( 4 ) THE appellant is being tried for certain offences under the Indian Penal Code along with the offences under the POTA and also under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive substances Act.

( 5 ) SRI C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned senior Counsel, appearing for the appellant, contends that the trial Court framed charges against the appellant under the POTA, despite the fact that the Review Committee, constituted under Section 60 of the POTA, found that the confessional statements allegedly made by the appellant, who is arrayed as accuse

Click Here to Read the rest of this document