DARA CHANDRABANSHI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for both sides.

(2.) IT is submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has been dragged in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement recorded by the Sub Inspector of Police though there is mandatory provision that such confessional statement be recorded by the Superintendent of Police as enunciated under section 32 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 but without complying the said provision, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet against the accused persons including the appellant without applying his mind though no confessional statement was ever recorded by the Superintendent of Police. Thus, in such circumstance, the confessional statement recorded by the Sub -Inspector of Police and submission of charge sheet under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) on the basis of the said confessional statement is beyond the provision of law. The Superintendent of Police, Garhwa is directed to keep watch over such mischief on the part of the Investigating Officer and they must be instructed to comply the provision of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 strictly in future.

(3.) LET a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Garhwa for needful.