https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282796 An accused cannot be treated as non-cooperative merely because he does not confess during investigation, as the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) protects against compulsion to confess. Custodial interrogation is not justified solely to obtain a confession, and coercive methods cannot be used for that purpose. If there is genuine non-cooperation in completing the investigation, the State may seek cancellation of bail or further orders. In the peculiar facts, the question of any further coercive custody was left to the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which may examine the collected material and decide whether such custody is warranted. en-us Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Nov 2025 12:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282796 An accused cannot be treated as non-cooperative merely because he does not confess during investigation, as the right against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) protects against compulsion to confess. Custodial interrogation is not justified solely to obtain a confession, and coercive methods cannot be used for that purpose. If there is genuine non-cooperation in completing the investigation, the State may seek cancellation of bail or further orders. In the peculiar facts, the question of any further coercive custody was left to the jurisdictional Sessions Court, which may examine the collected material and decide whether such custody is warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282796