Supreme Court Affirms Acquittal in TADA Case Due to Inadmissible Confessions & Principle of Estoppel

The present appeal is preferred by the CBI against a Special Court's judgment acquitting the accused in a case registered in 1990 concerning the kidnapping and murder of the Vice-Chancellor of Kashmir University and his Personal Secretary. The prosecution's case heavily relied on confessional statements recorded under the then-operative Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA).

The Supreme Court dismissed the CBI's appeals, affirming the acquittal. The Court held that the confessional statements of the accused were inadmissible due to significant procedural irregularities in their recording, violating Section 15 of the TADA Act, Rule 15 of the TADA Rules, and the guidelines established in Kartar Singh Vs. State of Punjab. The Court also upheld the rejection of Mohd. Salim Zargar's confession based on the principle of issue estoppel, as it had been deemed inadmissible in a prior, unchallenged judgment.

•The Apex Court stressed the mandatory nature of the procedural safeguards prescribed for recording confessions under the TADA Act to ensure voluntariness and fairness.
•The Court found serious deficiencies in the recording of the confessions, including the lack of a free atmosphere (recorded in BSF camp and JICs), absence of recorded questions to ascertain voluntariness, no evidence of time given for reflection, and inconsistencies in the recorded dates.
•The doctrine of issue estoppel was applied to prevent the prosecution from relying on a confessional statement of one of the accused that had already been rejected in a previous trial.
•The Court expressed its concern over the prolonged trial and the failure to secure justice, noting the subsequent repeal of the TADA Act's "Draconian Provisions".

Supreme Court while retirating the Principle of issue of estoppel as known as "‘cause of action estoppel’" and by refering to its earlier judgment in case of Ravinder Singh Vs Sukhbir Singh (Click to Download) held that the principle estoppel applied where an issue of fact has already been tried by a competent court at one occasion, pursuant to which the findings has been reached in favour of an accused. Then, such a finding would then constitute an estoppel, or res judicata against the prosecution and it preclude the reception of evidence that disturbs findings for which the accused was tried already, even if the same evidence is for different offence, which might be permitted by Section 300(2) CrPC. However, the Apex Court held that the estoppel would bar to the trial and conviction of the accused for a different or distinct offence.

Thus, applying the rule of issue estoppel which prevents re-litigation of an issue which has been determined in a criminal trial the Apex Court dismissed the appeal filed by Central Bureau of Investigation.

Coram: Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Between: State (CBI) Vs Mohd. Salim Zargar & Ors. 2025 INSC 376
Date of Judgment: 20-03-2025