IMPORTANT POINT
Confessions are weak evidence without corroboration, lack of probative value of confessions, and the necessity of intention to further terrorist activities under the Act of 1967.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kumar, CJ. - By way of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.55(08)2009 MI PS registered on the file of Mayang Imphal Police Station under Sections 212, 121, 121-A and 34 IPC; Section 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and Section 25(I-C) of the Arms Act, 1959, in so far as it concerns him.

1. By order dated 24.03.2021, this Court directed that no charge sheet should be filed against the petitioner, if it had not already been filed.

2. Heard Mr. A. Mohendro, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur, for the respondents.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that while he was travelling towards Mayang Imphal on the fateful day, viz., 14.08.2009, in his Gypsy vehicle bearing Registration No. MN-01W-4594, an unknown person stopped him and asked for a lift to the city. The petitioner stated that he obliged him as a good Samaritan but on the way his vehicle was stopped and they were arrested, leading to registration of the subject FIR on 15.08.2009. The petitioner further stated that, as matters stand, he is alleged to have committed offences under Sections 19 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter, 'the Act of 1967'). He asserted that the only evidence against him is his own alleged confession statement and the confession statement of his original co-accused, the person who he claimed took a lift from him on that day. The petitioner further asserted that his confession was coerced and obtained under duress and it could not be used against him in view of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter, 'the Act of 1872'). He claimed that no incriminating material was found either in his vehicle or on his person or recovered at his behest. He asserted that Section 19 of the Act of 1967 could not be applied to him as he had never 'harboured' or 'concealed' or 'attempted to harbour or conceal' any person, knowing that such person was a terrorist. He reiterated that he had only given a lift on humanitarian grounds and had no knowledge that the said person had any links with a banned outfit. He further asserted that Section 39 of the Act of 1967 has been wrongly applied as none of the ingredients thereof are made out, even prima facie. Lastly, he pointed out that even though more than 11 years had passed since the alleged incident, no charge sheet had been filed till date and contended that continuation of the proceedings against him under the subject FIR is unsustainable in law. It is on these grounds that he sought quashing of the subject FIR against him.

4. The Inspector General of Police (Administration), Manipur, filed an affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the police authorities. Therein, he stated that on 15.08.2009 at 8.00 p.m., the complainant had lodged a written report stating that on 14.08.2009 at 2.00 p.m., based on reliable information about the movement of senior PLA (People's Liberation Army) cadres towards Imphal from Sekmaijin side, with an intention to disrupt Independence Day celebrations at Imphal, he along with a 12 Maratha Column put up a Road Opening Party (ROP) at Uchiwa Lamkhai. After about 5 minutes, they stopped and checked a Gypsy vehicle and found two occupants therein, namely, Oinam Lukhoi Singh @ Ingo, the petitioner herein, and one Selheibam Joy @ Jayanta @ Malangba. Their interrogation is stated to have revealed that Joy @ Jayanta joined the PLA in 1997 and was actively involved in its activities. Upon the information given by him, arms and ammunition were stated to have been recovered at Laphupat Tera at 10 p.m. on the same day. Thereafter, the subject FIR was registered against both of them and investigation commenced. Both the accused persons were stated to have recorded their confession statements, admitting their guilt. Joy @ Jayanta was stated to have revealed that he was holding the rank of Second Lieutenant in the PLA. He implicat