The alleged companyfession was subsequently retracted by the appellant.
The appellant was number named in the FIR.
Five persons including the appellant were charged for his death.
The facts of the case are similar to the facts in Arup Bhuyan vs. State of Assam Criminal Appeal No.889 of 2007, which we allowed on 3.2.2011.
As in the case of Arup Bhuyan supra , the only evidence against the appellant in this case is his alleged companyfession made to a police officer, for which he was charged under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1987 in short TADA .
No prosecution witness has attributed any role to the appellant.
There is numberevidence against the appellant except the companyfessional statement.
Service of Notice of Lodgment of petition of Appeal is companyplete, but numberone has entered appearance on behalf of the sole respondent State.
The alleged companyfession was number companyroborated by any other material.
The charge sheet in the case was filed after a gap of nine years from the date of the companymission of the offence, and charges were framed more than four years after filing of the charge sheet.
The facts of the case are that one Anil Kumar Das went missing from the evening of 6.11.1991, and his dead body was recovered after two months on 19.1.1992 from the river Dishang.
MARKANDEY KATJU, J. Heard learned companynsel for the appellant.
