Back
2009(3) Supreme 170
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Madhya Pradesh High Court)
S.B. Sinha, Dr. Mukundakam Sharma and H.L. Dattu, JJ.
U.O.I. — Appellant
versus
Bal Mukund & Ors. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1397 of 2007
Decided on : 31-03-2009
(b) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 67 – Section 30, Evidence Act being not applicable, merely a statement before any authority may bind the maker but not those who had been implicated therein. (Para 22)
(2005) 11 SCC 600 – Relied upon.
1995 Supp (4) SCC 663 – Distinguished.
(c) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 67 – A confession must be voluntary – A statement made during integration cannot be construed as confession – Circumstances attendant to making of such statements should be taken into consideration. (Paras 27 and 29)
(1997)1 SCC 416; (1999) 3 SCC 977; 2008 (9) SCALE 681 – Relied upon.
(d) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 67 – Conviction should not be based merely on the basis of a statement made u/s 67 of the Act without any independent corroboration particularly in view of the fact that such statements have been retracted – Confessional statement of a co-accused could not be used as substantive evidence against the co-accused. (Paras 30 and 36)
(2006) 13 SCC 210; (2007) 8 SCC 254; (2007) 6 SCC 410 – Relied upon.
JT 2006 (12) SC 416; (2001)10 SCC 203; (2003) 8 SCC 449; (2008) 4 SCC 668 – Distinguished.
(e) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 55 r/w Standing Instruction No. 1/88 – Samples not collected in accordance with section 55 and the standing instructions vitiates the proceedings. (Para 39)
(f) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 379 – Appellate court would not interfere with a judgment of acquittal only because another view is possible. (Para 41)
(2008) 5 SCC 368 – Relied upon.
Facts of the case :
1. On a secret information, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein Bal Mukund and Basanti Lal were intercepted and searched. 10 Kgs. of Opium packed in 5 polythene bag of 2 Kg. each from each of them were said to have been recovered.
2. The purported confessions of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were recorded.
3. Respondent No. 3 sent an application to the learned Special Judge, Ratlam retracting his confession through the Superintendent of District Jail, Ratlam on 24.06.1998. It was received in the Court of the Special Judge on the same day. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 also filed applications retracting their confessions on or about 5.09.1998.
4. The learned Special Judge recorded a judgment of conviction and sentence.
5. The High Court, however, reversed the said findings of the learned Special Judge.
Finding of the Court :
The purported confessions made by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 could not in absence of other corroboration form the basis of conviction.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, J. —
1. Union of India is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 13.05.2005 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in Criminal Appeal Nos. 964 and 1108 of 2000.
2. The factual matrix involved herein is as under:
Sub-Inspector Bajrang Lal posted in the Office of the Central Bureau of Narcotics, Ratlam purported to have obtained a secret information to the effect that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein Bal Mukund and Basanti Lal would be carrying about 20 Kg. of Opium on the next day. A preventive party allegedly was formed pursuant to or in furtherance of the said information. At about 0430 hours on 21.06.1998, they reached Nayapura Phanta on Ratlam Jaora Road. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were seen carrying cement gunny bags. They were searched. 10 Kgs. of Opium packed in 5 polythene bag of 2 Kg. each from each of them were said to have been recovered.
3. The purported confessions of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were recorded on 21.06.1998, unofficial translated version whereof reads as under:
“Statement of Respondent No. 1
...My father is debt ridden to Amritlal Anjana out of Rs. 38000/- out of which Rs. 18000/- has been paid now. Their balance is Rs. 20,000/-. This sum of Rs. 38000/- were given to me by Amritlal Anjana for motor for well and some amount was taken in cash. Amritlal suggested that if I wishes to liquidate my father’s debt then I should away opium and give it to suggested destination. I shall give good wages against it. A sum of Rs. 3000/- were decided for carrying the opium. I came from my village Nandwell to Behpur and Basantilal who is my relative. Both met Amritlal Anjana at 10-00 night at his well Amritlal Anjana by Giving 10-000 Kgs each of us with the opium and directly to go on feet towards Nandi. He also said he would be available nearly Nandi Phanta. He said, he would give Rs. 3000/- to each by way of wages when we came on foot by & carrying 10-000 Kgs of opium and reached Nayapura Phatak then Narcotics officers detained us and took our formal search. He found opium in the bag mean for cement weight 10-000 Kgs. Which was seized by Narcotics Deptd. Raltmal and I was detained for carrying illicit opium weight 10-000 Kg. under the office of N.D.P.C. This statement I am giving voluntarily and in full consciousness whether is spoken is underwritten to which I having read and finding it to be correct put my signature.
Statement of Respondent No. 2
...On further interrogation stated that they are opium weighing 10 kg and 10 kg opium from my colleague has been recovered for which on interrogation I state truly that on 20-06-1998 Balmukund came to my village Behpur and said that we have to go to Maukhedi at the residence of Amritlal S/o Raghunath Anajan therefore I alongwith Balmukund proceeded for Behpur come to Maukhedi who Amritlal Anjana and that we should go to his well where I shall give you opium or reached the well Amritlal Anjana gave me in a bag of 10 kg of opium and 10 kg to my colleague Balmukund and we should go on foot on unconstructed road and reached Nanda Phatak where I will be awaiting nearly and collect the opium, we were coming on foot towards Nandi then Narcotics officer took our search then in the bag. I was carrying opium weighing 10 kg. was recovered and 10 kg. of opium was also recovered from my colleagues Balmukund. The opium so recovered was taken into government possession under N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. The statement which I have made is in full consciousness, voluntarily and whatever I stated is only written to which I hearing/ read put my signature.”
4. Indisputably, they were arrested. Thereafter also they made similar statements. However, as no reliance has been placed thereupon, it is not necessary for us to refer thereto.
5. On a purported confession made by them that they were carrying the said contraband at the behest of Accused No. 3 Amritlal, a search was conducted in his house at about 1.30 p.m. No contraband, howev
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
