1. This matter has been referred to a 3-Judge Bench doubting the correctness of the decision in State vs. Nalini, (1999) 5 SCC 253 as to admissibility of a confession in terms of Sec. 15 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. It is stated that there are similar provisions available even under Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (POTA). If really the question as posed by the 2-Judge Bench is to be answered, it could only be done by a Bench of 5 Judges as Nalini's case (supra) has been decided by a bench of three learned Judges.
2. Therefore, this matter is referred to 5-Judge Bench. The Registry is directed to place the papers before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.