Introduced Section 10-A of the act unconstitutional. Section 10-A permits detention on any of the grounds specified by a deputy commissioner of a district. Under the original act a person had to be released even if one of the detention grounds was found to be invalid and unreasonable; but the new section 10—A, incorporated into the Act in early 1987, permits detention for “pre- judicial activities” even if only one ground was found to be valid. The court ruled that section 10-A removed existing constitutional safeguards and infringed the fundamental rights guaranteed in the constitution. The court ordered the release of an alleged member of the Muslim United Front, saying that the detainee was not given any material with which he could have made an effective representation against his detention, as the constitution required. The court also granted him compensation.
3.3 The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act
In 1987 the government strengthened the provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1985. Its provisions lapsed in May but were immediately replaced by an ordinance and later, in September, by an act of the same name. The 1987 act allows detention in judicial custody without formal charge or trial for purposes of investigation for up to a year; during this period bail is difficult to obtain. The act also provides for trials on charges of widely defined “terrorist acts” by special courts sitting in camera, if necessary in jail. The identity of witnesses appearing before the courts can be kept secret. Appeal against orders passed by the special courts can be made only to the Supreme Court -a course of action few people can afford. The government also introduced a new section, Section 15, into the act which makes a confession to a senior police officer admissible in evidence provided the police have “reason to believe that it (the statement) is being made voluntarily.” This is an important departure from the existing rules of evidence
