SRI INDRA DAS vs THE STATE OF ASSAM

The Supreme Court held that mere membership in a banned organization under Section 3(5) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) does not suffice for conviction unless there is evidence of active participation in violent acts or incitement to violence. The Court reiterated the principle established in Arup Bhuyan's case, emphasizing that a confession made to police is weak evidence without corroboration. The appellant's conviction was overturned due to lack of evidence linking him to any violent activities, leading to his acquittal.