IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that mere confessions or disclosures without corroborative evidence do not justify prolonged detention under the NDPS Act.

ORDER :

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

2. The first and second bail applications of petitioner- Pura Ram came to be dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide orders dated 22.02.2024 & 21.03.2024 passed in SBCRLMB Nos.13190/2023 & 3568/2024 whereas first bail application of the petitioner Rakesh was dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2024 passed in SBCRLMB No.1373/2024. While dismissing the earlier bail application, this Court afforded liberty to the petitioner to renew their prayer for bail after recording the statement of Investigating Officer. Now, the Investigating Officer has been examined. Hence, the instant bail applications.

3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioners that no case for the alleged offences is made out against them and their incarceration is not warranted. Pura Ram and Rakesh are behind the bars since 05.10.2023 & 20.10.2023. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioners and they have been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

5. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

6. Perusal of the record revealing that on 10.07.2023 near the Neemach-Chittorgarh Highway, during nakabandi, SHO, PS Sadar Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh intercepted an Eicher Truck bearing registration No.GJ34 T 2754. During search 135 Kg poppy husk came to be recovered and its driver Jawahar Lal got arrested. At the time of arrest of Jawahar Lal stated nothing with regard to the petitioners after that the investigation was handed over to another police official Adhyatam Gautam. On 11.07.2023 at 12:15 p.m. it is claimed that the principal accused Jawahar Lal made a disclosure to the police inspector to the effect that he can show the place wherefrom he procured the poppy husk without any reference to the petitioners. Again on 12.07.2023, at about 8:00 p.m. he made another disclosure but did not mention the name of the petitioners. Whereafter, again on 12.07.2023 at about 11:30 p.m. he made a disclosure that the recovered contraband was provided to him by one Rakesh S/o Gopal Meena R/o Rajora, P.S. Hathunia, District Pratapgarh and he alleged to have told to take the policeman at the place wherefrom the contraband was taken by him. Strangely, at the time of his 4th disclosure statement which was recorded on 14.07.2023 at 6:30 p.m. in which the petitioner-Pura Ram has been targeted regarding procurement of the contraband poppy husk. There is substance in the plea raised by Shri Abhishek Purohit, learned counsel representing petitioner that had it been a “voluntary” disclosure, if it is, then the principal accused must have made a mention of the petitioners name in his earlier disclosure statements but that is not the situation here rather in the third disclosure statement the name of petitioner Rakesh was disclosed and whereafter strangely the accusation has been shifted upon the petitioner at the time of recording his 4th disclosure. Learned counsel strangely and fervently argued that if the 3rd and 4th disclos