ANIRUDH SINHJI KARANSINHJI JADEJA vs STATE OF GUJARAT

The Supreme Court held that the invocation of Sections 3 and 5 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) against the appellants was incorrect, as the facts did not substantiate the application of TADA. The Court emphasized that the prosecution failed to establish a nexus between the alleged crime and the provisions of TADA, leading to the conclusion that the appellants were wrongfully charged under this statute. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellants.