Confessional statement under anti-terror law remained relevant at bail stage despite delayed retraction, supporting refusal of bail.

A confessional statement recorded by an authorised officer under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 and included in the charge-sheet was treated as material at the bail stage. The Court held that the belated retraction, made after considerable delay and not shown to be coerced, did not undermine the confession for purposes of bail. It also noted that while no statutory time limit governs retraction, it must be made within a reasonable time. On these facts, the materials did not justify release on bail, and the refusal of bail was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to bail in view of the confessional statement recorded under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 and its subsequent retraction.

Analysis: The confessional statement was recorded by an authorised officer under Section 32 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 and formed part of the charge-sheet. The retraction came after a considerable delay and was not shown to be vitiated by coercion. At the stage of bail, such a confession could be treated as material, and the surrounding facts did not disclose a case warranting release on bail. The Court also noted that there was no statutory time limit for retraction, but it had to be made within a reasonable time.

Conclusion: The prayer for bail was rejected and the refusal of bail was upheld.

---