Supreme Court of India Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran Date of Judgment: January 27, 2026 Sections: Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 201; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 164 Constitution of India – Articles 21, 22(1), Mohammed Ajmal Kasab v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 1.
Brief Facts & Judgment
The appellants were charged under Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC for allegedly murdering a man in Meghalaya. The Trial Court, after examining the evidence, acquitted the accused. The State appealed, and the Meghalaya High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting the appellants primarily on the basis of their confessional statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., which they had subsequently retracted.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court, through a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran, set aside the High Court’s conviction. The Court held that while a confession can be the basis for conviction if found voluntary and true, it cannot sustain a conviction without corroboration. Critically, the confessions were recorded when the accused were unrepresented by counsel and were not informed of their constitutional right to legal aid under Articles 21 and 22(1). Relying on Mohammed Ajmal Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012) 9 SCC 1, the Court emphasised the magistrate’s mandatory duty to inform accused persons of their right to legal representation before recording confessions. The retracted, uncorroborated confessions recorded without these safeguards could not be legally relied upon. The conviction was set aside, and the Trial Court’s acquittal was restored.