2011 (2) TMI 1627

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re not repeating the same here except wherever necessary. 4. The Appellant is alleged to be a member of ULFA and the only material produced by the prosecution against the Appellant is his alleged confessional statement made before the Superintendent of Police in which he is said to have identified the house of the deceased. 5. Confession to a police officer is inadmissible vide Section 25 of the Evidence Act, but it is admissible in TADA cases vide Section 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. 6. Confession is a very weak kind of evidence. As is well known, the wide spread and rampant practice in the police in India is to use third degree methods for extracting confessions from the alleged accused. Hence, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction 3(5) of the TADA which makes mere membership of a banned organisation criminal. Although the Appellant has denied that he was a member of ULFA, which is a banned organisation. Even assuming he was a member of ULFA it has not been proved that he was an active member and not a mere passive member. 12. In State of Kerala v. Raneef 2011 (1) Scale 8, we have respectfully agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Elfbrandt v. Russell, 384 U.S. 17 (1966) which has rejected the doctrine of 'guilt by association'. Mere membership of a banned organisation will not incriminate a person unless he resorts to violence or incites people to violence or does an act intended to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to v....