Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Chandra Shekhar Sharma
Rakesh Kumar S/o Vinod Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of bail applications and offences. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail applications. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence and arguments. (Para 7 , 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. admissibility of confessions under the ndps act. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. conclusion and dismissal of bail applications. (Para 15 , 16) |
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
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....
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....
The admissibility of self-inculpatory statements and electronic records under the NDPS Act is subject to specific legal requirements, as interpreted by relevant case law.
Confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act are inadmissible as evidence, necessitating admissible evidence for trial.
Bail application—Complicity of petitioner will have to be determined by quality of evidence led during trial.
Confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS act are not admissible in evidence, and the lack of recovery of narcotic substance at the accused's instance can be considered in bail ap....
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.
The court emphasized that mere suspicion and co-accused statements are insufficient for denying bail; legally admissible evidence is required to connect the accused to the crime.
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.
Co-accused statements are inadmissible as evidence, and absence of reasonable grounds for belief in the accused's involvement satisfies bail conditions.
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
