The admissibility of evidence, the duty of the court to consider the accused's role in the case, and the constitutional guarantees were the central legal principles established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT

Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral). - This is a first petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR no.130 dated 27.10.2021 registered under Sections 15(c)/29/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (in short 'NDPS Act').

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case although the petitioner had been named in the secret information but he was not apprehended at the spot, nor any recovery had been effected from the petitioner and the alleged recovery in the present case had been effected from co-accused Daljit Singh. It is further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 26.05.2022 and even after his arrest, no recovery has been effected from him. It is also stated that the petitioner is sought to be implicated solely on the basis of secret information and on the basis of disclosure statement made by co-accused Daljit Singh and there is no other material against the present petitioner, nor there are any call details between the petitioner and Daljit Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as 'Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu' reported as 2021(4) SCC 1 and judgment passed in CRM-M-12051-2020, by a coordiante Bench of this Court dated 17.06.2021 titled as 'Mewa Singh Vs. State of Punjab' and the judgment passed in CRM-M-12997-2020 titled as 'Daljit Singh Vs. State of Haryana', to contend that the disclosure statement made before the police is inadmissible in evidence.

3. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the present petition for regular bail and has submitted that recovery from the co- accused Daljit Singh is 110 kgs of poppy husk which comes within the ambit of commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the petitioner is involved in other cases also. However, the other facts have not been disputed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. and another', reported as 2012 (2) SCC 382 to contend that the facts and circumstances of the present case are to be seen while deciding a bail application and the bail application of the petitioner cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the petitioner is involved in other cases. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

'As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc.'

5. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paper book.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh's case (Supra), had observed as under:-

'152. Thus, to arrive at the conclusion that a confessional statement made before an officer designated under section 42 or section 53 can be the basis to convict a person under the NDPS Act, without any non obstante clause doing away with section 25 of the Evidence Act, and without any safeguards, would be a direct infringement of the constitutional guarantees contained in Articles 14, 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution of India.'

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court Mewa Singh's case (Supra), had passed the following order-

'1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.133 dated 24.11.2019 under Section 21 NDPS Act Police Station Lohian, District Jalandhar.

2. Reply way of affidavit of Mr. Piara Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent ofPolice, Sub-Division Shahkot, District Jalandhar (Rural) on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed, which is taken on record.

3. The allegations in nut-shell are that Bachittar Singh was found in possession of 1.7 Kgs. 'Heroin'. Duri