BALBIR SINGH vs STATE OF HARYANA

The Supreme Court held that in appeals under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987, the court must scrutinize evidence thoroughly, as the appeal is both the first and final appeal. The Court found significant discrepancies in witness testimonies and the absence of independent witnesses, leading to doubts about the prosecution's case. Consequently, the Court acquitted the appellant due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the need for rigorous investigation under the Act.