Confessions made to officers of the Central Bureau of Narcotics are admissible in evidence, as they do not qualify as police officers under the Evidence Act, impacting the evaluation of possession in narcotics cases.

ORDER :

CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA, J.

The present bail applications have been preferred by the petitioners under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No.VIII(IO)10/NCB/JZU/2022 registered at Police Station NCB, Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Sections 8 /29 of the NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The only allegation against the petitioners is of money transaction said to be made with the co-accused, which by itself does not establish conscious possession, transportation, or dealing with narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. It is further urged that the petitioners have been implicated on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused and such a disclosure statement, standing alone, is not admissible in evidence.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also contended that the entire case of the prosecution is primarily founded upon the so-called confessional statement alleged to have been recorded by the officers of the Central Bureau of Narcotics.

4. Learned counsel has also drawn attention of this Court to the fact that similarly situated co-accused Baldev Singh Bishnoi, Anil Suthar and Jagdish have already been enlarged on bail by the respective co-ordinate Benches of this Court. It is contended that the present petitioners, against whom no recovery has been effected and their implication rests solely on the basis of the information of the co-accused, stands on a better footing, and therefore deserves parity in the matter of bail.

5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. The accused-petitioners are in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take long time. Therefore, it is prayed that the accused-petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

6. Controverting the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently submits that the petitioners are involved in financial transactions and the money trail shows their nexus with the co-accused from whom contraband was recovered. Learned Public Prosecutor further alleges that the petitioners are involved in procurement and distribution of narcotic substances. It is further alleged that a substantial monetary transaction took place between the petitioner and the co-accused, which is evidenced through bank records and the call record.

7. I have considered the rival submissions advanced at the Bar and scanned through the entire material available on record.

8. The prosecution case alleges that the petitioners are involved in trading and circulation of narcotics. In pursuance of the Notice issued by the Prosecution under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, petitioners Rakesh Kumar and Satyanarayan @ Sattu appeared before the Investigating Officer and voluntarily gave their statements, extract of which read thus:

Rakesh Kumar -

As per the prosecution, the accused Rakesh Kumar Verma S/o Vinod Verma admitted that he had been involved in smuggling poppy husk since 2020 along with co-accused Murali Sharma, Satyanarayan Jat @ Sattu, and Ladu Rebari. He further disclosed that on 09.04.2022 and 14.04.2022, he facilitated the procurement and loading of 160 kg and 155 kg of poppy husk respectively for co-accused Anil Sain, for which he received payment in cash and online. He also admitted that approximately 360 kg of poppy husk was purchased jointly by him and his associates from Rameshwar Lal Dhakad and sold at a profit, and the amount transferred by Anil Sain was withdrawn and distributed among them. He identified the co-accused and ad