Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH
Kumar Chand – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIRENDER SINGH, J.
1. Applicant-Kumar Chand has filed the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, arising out of FIR No. 133/2024, dated 21.11.2024, under Sections 18, 20, 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ND&PS Act’), registered with Police Station Palampur, District Kangra, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent and has falsely been implicated, in this case.
3. As per the stand of the applicant, he has been arrested mainly on the ground of having committed offence under Section 29 of the ND&PS Act, whereas no contraband has been recovered from him nor at his instance. The alleged contraband was recovered from an unclaimed bag in the bus and no passenger came forward to own the same.
4. It is his further case that he has been named as accused in the case, on the basis of statement of co-passenger and said statement is stated to be inadmissible and the same is hit by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Toofan Singh’s case. He has termed the entire prosecution c
The court ruled that statements made under police influence are inadmissible against co-accused in NDPS cases, allowing bail due to lack of prima facie evidence.
The court ruled that involvement of an accused must be substantiated by adequate evidence, and statements by co-accused cannot solely establish guilt under the NDPS Act.
The court emphasized that mere allegations and statements from co-accused do not suffice for denying bail; there must be substantial evidence establishing a prima facie case.
Bail granted in commercial quantity NDPS case where evidence solely from inadmissible co-accused police confessions and CDRs (trial-stage evaluation), no financial links, investigation complete, pari....
Bail granted in NDPS commercial quantity case as co-accused police custody statements inadmissible for conviction, CDRs' value for trial; Section 37 twin conditions satisfied via parity, lack of fina....
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, bail requires court findings beyond prima facie that accused not guilty and unlikely to reoffend; direct recovery presence and CDR evidence preclude such satisfacti....
The need for substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and the deleterious impact of narcotic drugs on society.
Bail granted in NDPS commercial quantity case where applicant linked solely by co-accused's inadmissible disclosure statement under CrPC s.162 and Evidence Act s.25; CDRs' evidentiary value deferred ....
In NDPS commercial quantity bail, confessional statements to police inadmissible; CDRs' evidentiary value at trial. Absence of financial links, reliance on shelter allegation insufficient for prima f....
In commercial quantity NDPS cases, co-accused confessional statements to police inadmissible; CDRs' evidentiary value for trial; bail granted where prima facie not guilty based on weak links, parity,....
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
