SUNDERLAL KANAIYALAL BHATIJA vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .

The Supreme Court addressed the admissibility of confessional statements recorded under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act, 1987 (TADA Act) in prosecutions for other offences, specifically under Sections 302, 307, 353, and 402 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 35(c) of the Arms Act, 1959. The Court held that such confessions, made in a TADA case, cannot be used as substantive evidence in unrelated criminal proceedings once the TADA provisions are dropped. The appeal was allowed, overturning the Bombay High Court's dismissal of the application to admit the confessional statement as evidence in the IPC case.