IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that for charges under the NDPS Act, corroborative evidence is essential to substantiate claims of abetment or conspiracy.

ORDER :

Farjand Ali, J.

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below :

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor as well as gone through the record of the case.

4. Bereft of elaborate details, briefly stated the facts of the case are germane for disposal of the instant bail application would be that the police team of Chhatargarh, District Bikaner made an interception of a vehicle on 11.06.2022 in which two persons namely, Vishna Ram and Shiv Pratap were sitting. Looking to their suspicious activities when due process was adopted in accordance with the mandate of NDPS Act, search of the vehicle was affected and around 160 kilogram poppy husk came to be recovered from their possession. After search and seizure when initially they were negated, it was disclosed that the vehicle belonged to one Rauf Khan and they procured the contraband from the petitioner. The two accused persons named above were detained and after usual investigation, they were arrested. During the course of the investigation, the petitioner was apprehended for the charge that he either abetted or conspired together with the aforementioned two accused persons for procurement of the contraband. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed, charges have been framed and some of the prosecution witnesses have been examined. The co-accused Vikram @ Vikas @ Chhutia has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.12.2023 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10899/2023.

5. After going through the entire material as made available to this Court, more particularly, the statement of prosecution witness No.2 - Vinod Kumar who has been examined in the trial as an Investigating Officer; it transpired that there is a substance in the defence plea that no legally admissible evidence is available on record so as to @@ his further incarceration. Admittedly, the petitioner was not present when the contraband was recovered from two persons, namely, Vishna Ram and Shiv Pratap. Nothing has been recovered from the petitioner. He is not the owner and occupier of the vehicle in which the contraband was transported. He has been made accused in this case solely and majorly on the basis of confessional statement made by principal accused to the Police Officer while they were in police custody.

6. Except the above disclosure which is mere confession in nature; there is nothing on record so as to substantiate the charge that either the petitioner was a party to abetment or conspiracy with the principal accused persons. For a moment, if the contention made by principal accused to a Police Officer is removed from the file, there remains nothing to fortify the charge under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. The P.W.-2 (Vinod Kumar) who investigated the matter has candidly admitted in cross-examination that no mobile phone was recovered from the petitioner. He also admitted that the CDR and tower location and details of the confession of the petitioner and the other accused Vishna Ram were not obtained by him. He further admitted that he did not conduct investigation on this point as to with which phone number