Back
J. B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
Rajkumar Hariram Gameti – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background facts of the case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's analysis of the applicable law. (Para 6 , 10) |
| 4. established legal principles regarding confessions. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. conclusion: appeal succeeds and earlier conviction overturned. (Para 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
2. The short facts necessary to be narrated for disposal of this appeal are as under:-
2.2 The case of the prosecution is that the original accused no.1, namely, Kantilal Fulaji Rangot, was found to be in conscious possession of 624 grams of brown sugar. The search was carried out on the strength of the information which the Narcotics Control Bureau officials had with them.
2.4 In the course of the trial, so far as the appellant herein is concerned, his own statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was read into evidence and accordingly, he was held guilty for the alleged offences. His appeal before the High Court also came to be dismissed. In such circumstances, the present appeal has come up before us.
3. We have heard Mr. Rahul Narayan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-convict and Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, the learned Additional Solici
Confessions recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible for conviction, altering the evidentiary landscape regarding drug-related offenses.
Confessions of co-accused are inadmissible against another accused without corroborative evidence, leading to quashing of proceedings due to lack of substantive evidence.
Confessional statements made to officers under the NDPS Act are inadmissible, and mere dock identification is insufficient for conviction.
Confessional statements of co-accused, lacking corroborative evidence, cannot establish guilt against another accused under the NDPS Act, resulting in quashing of proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the inadmissibility of confessional statements made by the accused under the NDPS Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, and the retrospective a....
Confessional statements of co-accused, without corroboration, cannot sustain criminal charges against another accused under the NDPS Act.
The threshold requirements of a confessional statement and the lack of recovery of contraband from the accused's possession are crucial factors in determining the conviction under NDPS Act.
Point of Law : In the absence of there being any other material available with the prosecution connecting the petitioner with the commission of offence alleged against him, except the statement of th....
Confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act are inadmissible as evidence, necessitating admissible evidence for trial.
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
