Sagayam vs State Of Karnataka

The Supreme Court examined the applicability of Sections 3 and 5 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities Act, 1987 (TADA) and Section 307 IPC in the context of the appellant's conviction. The Court emphasized that to constitute a 'terrorist act' under Section 3(1) TADA, the act must be done with the intent to overawe the government, strike terror, alienate people, or adversely affect harmony among sections of society. The Court found that the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish the requisite intent, leading to the conclusion that the conviction under TADA was not sustainable, resulting in the appeal being allowed and the conviction set aside.