STATE THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI/SIT ETC. versus NALINI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1999] 3 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 11-05-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 9 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

( . 
( 
\ ; 
\ 
/ 
\ \ 
~ 
/_ 
j. 
> 
~ 
--' 
' 
.J 
STATE THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI/SIT ETC. 
v. 
NALINI AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
MAY 11, 1999 
[K.T. THOMAS, D.P. WADHWA AND SYED SHAH MOHAMMED 
QUADRI, JJ.] 
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) ACT. 1987: 
A 
B 
Ss. 15, 21-Evidentiary value of confession recorded by Police Officer C 
under S. 15 against its maker and against co-accused, abettor or 
Conspirator-Effect of non-obstante clause in S. 15(1)-S. 30 of Evidence 
Act, whether excluded-Amending Act 43 of J993-Addition of words "or co-
accused, abettor or conspirator" in S. J 5 (1) and deletion of clauses (c) and 
(d) of S. 2 J-Effect of-Confession of an accused-Admissibility as a 
substantive evidence against himself as well as a co-accused, abettor or D 
Conspirator. 
S. J 5-Vo/untary Confession-Sufficient time given to accused for 
reflection before making confession-Confession recorded shortly before expiry 
of remand-Effect of 
· 
S. 3-Applicability-Conditions for-Mens rea and criminal act-:-
Commission of terrorist act a sine qua non-Intention to overawe the 
Government, to strike terror in people, to alienate any s.:tction of the people 
or to adversely affect the harmony amongst sections of the people-Intention 
and consequence-Distinction between. 
Ss. 4(1) & 4(3)--Disruptive activity-Acts preceding the killing such 
as advocating, advising, inciting etc. of killing a public servant or any 
person bound by oath, and not the act of killing alone, would amount to 
disruptive activity. · 
E 
F 
Ss. 3, 4, J 2 and JS-Confession under S. JS-Accused tried for offences G 
under Ss. 3 and 4 as well as under other criminal laws-Even if offences 
under Ss. 3 and 4 not made out, confession made under S. JS would continue 
to be admissible for offences under other laws. 
TERRORIST AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) RULES, 
J987: 
H 
1 
A 
B 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1999] 3 S.C.R. 
Rule 15(3)-Confession-Omission to ajfzx signature on certain pages-
Not fatal since confession corroborated in material particulars by independent 
evidence apart from evidence of Co-accused-Ss. 164, 463 Cr. P.C. 
EVIDENCE ACT, 1872: 
S. 30-Applicability of-Conditions-Difference between S. 30 of 
Evidence Act and S. 15 of TADA Act. 
S.10-Scope and conditions for applicability of-Principle of agency 
between every conspirator and his associate underlies this provision-
Statement made by one conspirator admissible against another conspirator 
C only during the period of subsistence of agency-Conspirator's connection 
with the conspiracy-Not necessarily snapped after his arrest-Existence of 
conspiracy-Proof of 
PENAL CODE, 1860: 
Ss.120-A, 120-B, and 302-Criminal conspiracy-Ingredients-
D Principles governing law of conspiracy-Mere associates however close or 
even knowledge of conspiracy not enough-Agreement essential for offence 
of conspiracy. 
S.302 r/w, S.120-B-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Ss.354(3) 
E and 235(2)-Sentencing~Death sentence or life imprisonment-Test of rarest 
of rare case-Court to take into account the crime and the criminal as also 
the aggravating and mitigating circu'fnstances-On the facts and circumstances 
of the case, Held, per majority: four out of seven accused sentenced to 
death-Three accused sentenced to life imprisonment. 
F 
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973: 
S.300-Scope of-Second trial on the ground that some more allegcttions 
were not made in the first trial-Not to be allowed-Double jeoparayc...-
Constitution of India, Art, 20(2). 
Ss.215 & 465-Charges-Defects in charge-sheet alleged-Powers of 
G Reference Court. 
S.313-Improper examination of accused-Examination by Reference 
Court to correct the error-Scope of 
LEGAL MAXIMS 
H 
(1) Actus non facit reum mens nisi sit rea-App/icability of 
' ([ 
( 
) 
l_ 
/ 
\ 
I 
\ 
; 
I 
\ 
) 
i 
\ 
I 
\ 
-
I 
\ 
( 
> '; 
\ 
! 
\ i < 
I 
( 
I 
\ 
( 
l
STATE THROUGH CBI v. NALINI 
3 
(2) Justicia non novit patrem nee matrem-Applicability of 
A 
(3) "Nemo debet is vexari pro eadem causa"-Meaning and applicability 
of 
WORDS & PHRASES 
"Substantive Evidence", "Shall presume"-Meaning of 
On May 21, 1991 in Sriperambadur in Tamil Nadu at 10.20 p.m. a 
human bomb exploded which resulted in the death of former Prime Minister 
Shri Rajiv Gandhi as also 18 others and leaving 43 persons seriously 
B 
~~ 
c 
According to the prosecution, this was th~ handi work of LTTE because 
of its hatred towards Raj iv Gandhi since LTTE believed that it was force

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.