<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (7) TMI 1281 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171514</link>
    <description>A confession under Section 15 of TADA is admissible when it is voluntary, properly recorded and substantially compliant with statutory safeguards; absence of the exact memorandum form or a further certification by the Magistrate does not by itself make it inadmissible. On that basis, the confessions of A5 and A6, corroborated by surrounding evidence, supported conviction for murder and allied offences. The evidence also showed A3 had procured intimidation to induce delivery of property, justifying conviction for extortion under Section 384 read with Section 34 IPC despite failure of the larger conspiracy charge. The acquittals of A1 and A2 were maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:14:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 1281 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171514</link>
      <description>A confession under Section 15 of TADA is admissible when it is voluntary, properly recorded and substantially compliant with statutory safeguards; absence of the exact memorandum form or a further certification by the Magistrate does not by itself make it inadmissible. On that basis, the confessions of A5 and A6, corroborated by surrounding evidence, supported conviction for murder and allied offences. The evidence also showed A3 had procured intimidation to induce delivery of property, justifying conviction for extortion under Section 384 read with Section 34 IPC despite failure of the larger conspiracy charge. The acquittals of A1 and A2 were maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171514</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>