<?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>2000 (1) TMI 976 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171516</link>
    <description>A special anti-terror statute confession is substantive evidence when it is voluntary and substantially compliant with procedural safeguards, and it can be relied on with trustworthy eye-witness and circumstantial evidence to prove murder, unlawful assembly, criminal conspiracy, terrorist acts and related Arms Act offences. The article also notes that an earlier investigation may be treated as dishonest where the record shows delay and manipulation, while a later reinvestigation can be bona fide if supported by objective circumstances and family complaints. By contrast, suspicion and co-accused confessions alone are insufficient to convict police officers without independent evidence linking them to the charged offences.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:55:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391056" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 976 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171516</link>
      <description>A special anti-terror statute confession is substantive evidence when it is voluntary and substantially compliant with procedural safeguards, and it can be relied on with trustworthy eye-witness and circumstantial evidence to prove murder, unlawful assembly, criminal conspiracy, terrorist acts and related Arms Act offences. The article also notes that an earlier investigation may be treated as dishonest where the record shows delay and manipulation, while a later reinvestigation can be bona fide if supported by objective circumstances and family complaints. By contrast, suspicion and co-accused confessions alone are insufficient to convict police officers without independent evidence linking them to the charged offences.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>