Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR
Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Bhaiya, Son of Suraj Narayan Paswan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basis of prosecution's case (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on admissibility of confessions (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's reasoning on confession statements (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. final order allowing bail (Para 19 , 20) |
ORDER :
Jitendra Kumar, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special Case No. 173 of 2023/53A of 2021 arising out of NCB Crime No. 12 of 2021 dated 04.06.2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with Sections 21(c), 25 and 29 of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985.
3. As per allegation, 710 grams brown coloured substance appearing to be Morphine was recovered from the house of co-accused Sunni Kumar where, besides Sunni Kumar, Munna Ravidas and Raju Prasad were also present and all of them were arrested and as per confessional statements of co-accused Sunni Kumar, Munna Ravidas and Raju Prasad, the names of co-accused Mithlesh Kumar and Rahul Samrat transpired and in the confessional statement of Mithlesh Kumar as recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the name of the present petitioner transpired as Supplier of the contraband to the
Confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act are inadmissible as evidence, necessitating admissible evidence for trial.
(1) Confessional statement of accused as recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act is not admissible – Anticipatory bail granted.(2) Confession – Inadmissible confession cannot be proved during trial.
Admission of confessions under duress is inadmissible in court, necessitating evidence to establish a prima facie case.
A discharge application must be allowed if the prosecution's evidence, particularly confessions of co-accused, is inadmissible and no other corroborative evidence is present.
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....
A confessional statement made by a co-accused under section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be the sole basis for denying bail to a person from whose conscious possession there was no recovery.
Point of Law : . It is needless to say that any observations, particularly observation with regard to admissibility of confessional statement before trial shall not influence the trial judge so as to....
Bail should not be denied solely based on co-accused statements without sufficient evidence; the presumption of innocence persists until proven guilty, emphasizing that the general rule favors bail.
The court confirmed that under Section 37 NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to re-offend.
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
