The Supreme Court has reiterated that confession of a co-accused cannot by itself be taken as a substantive piece of evidence against another co-accused in the absence of specific provision in law to that effect. It can at best be used or utilized in order to lend assurance to the Court. In the absence of any substantive evidence, it would be inappropriate to base the conviction of the appellant purely on the statements of co-accused. The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justices AM Sapre and UU Lalit in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). […]
The post Confession is not substantive evidence against co-accused, reiterates Supreme Court
appeared first on Bar & Bench.