The admissibility of information supplied by an accused person while in police custody as the sole evidence connecting the accused with the commission of the crime.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

2. The petitioners have been arrested in FIR No.135/2019 of Police Station Choti Sadari, District Pratapgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and 29 of NDPS Act. They have preferred these second bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as per the prosecution story, the police seized huge quantity of narcotic contraband poppy straw on 24.05.2019 in a pick-up outside of village Rambhawali near the Cooperative Society building. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution story, one person was nabbed at the spot, however, another person ran away from the scene of crime. It is submitted that the person nabbed by the police was Pankaj, who during the course of interrogation, revealed that another person, who ran away from the scene of crime, was Shokin @ Rahul. It is further submitted that during the course of interrogation, the accused Pankaj also informed the police that Shokin @ Rahul procured the said narcotic contraband poppy straw from one Shyamdas. It is also submitted that on the basis of the information supplied by accused Pankaj, while in police custody, the police have arrested the petitioners and interrogated them. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that except the information supplied by accused Pankaj, while in police custody, no other evidence to connect the petitioners with commission of crime is available on record. It is submitted that now the statements of Investigating Officer Mohan Singh have been recorded before the trial court as PW-1, wherein he has specifically stated that no independent evidence except the information supplied by accused Pankaj, while in police custody, is available against the petitioners. It is submitted that it is settled that the information supplied by accused person while in police custody is not admissible in evidence.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications.

5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and after perusing the statements of Investigating Officer Mohan Singh PW-1, wherein he has specifically stated that except the information supplied by accused Pankaj, while in police custody, no other independent evidence was collected against the petitioners, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

6. Accordingly, these second bail applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that petitioners Shayamdas S/o Narayandas and Shokin @ Rahul S/o Vishnulal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.135/2019 of Police Station Choti Sadari, District Pratapgarh provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.