Confessional statements made to officers under the NDPS Act are barred by Section 25 of the Evidence Act, rendering them inadmissible for prosecution purposes, thus affecting the grounds for bail.

JUDGMENT

Brij Raj Singh, J.

Heard Sri Annil Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party Union of India, DRI, Lucknow, and perused record.

2. This first application for bail under Section 439 CrPC is moved with prayer for bail to applicant in DRI Case No.08/2022 under Section 8 /20/25/27A/29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS), PS Challaned by D.R.I., Gomti Nagar, district Lucknow.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged recovery of Ganja pertaining to 903.500 kg., is shown from the possession of co-accused Bapina Gouda and Ajit Kumar Naik but the same is shown neither to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant nor the applicant is career of the contraband substance.

4. As per prosecution case, two named accused persons Bapina Gouda and Ajit Kumar Naik were arrested at the place of occurrence on 30.5.2022 along with Truck No.OD-07-AC-0286 by the team of DRI Department, Lucknow at Sri Mahesh Prasad Degree College, National Highway, 24-B, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow-227305 (U.P.). The said truck was coming to Lucknow from Rae Bareli side and the truck driver was Bapina Gouda and other person who was sitting in the truck, was identified as Ajit Kuar Naik.

5. It is relevant to mention here that both accused persons who were arrested on spot, did not take the name of the applicant nor any statement was given against the applicant by them. In their confessional statement, they stated that the said truck was belonging to Balaji Svain Transport and contraband substance was uploaded by the owner of the Balaji Svain Transport. At the place of recovery, no incriminating substance recovered from the co-accused which could indicate that the applicant was involved in any manner.

6. It is submitted that surprisingly, after four months in the night of 2/3.10.2022, the DRI Officer in other case bearing DRI Case No.7 of 2019 under Section 8 /20/23/25/27/28/29 of NDPS Act, PS Challaned by DRI, Gomti Nagar, district Lucknow (in the said case, the applicant has been released on bail) and at the time of arrest, two mobile phones bearing Mobile Phone No.7889106729 and 8709937752 of the applicant have been recovered. Only on the basis of confessional statement, the applicant has been made accused in the present case and without any incriminating evidence, the DRI has planted the case to the extent that the recovered Ganja from the co-accused was to be delivered to the applicant.

7. It is relevant to mention here that the conversation of the aforesaid two mobile phone numbers has been investigated by the Investigating Officer and as per call detail, there is no conversation between the applicant and other two co-accused i.e. co-accused Bapina Gouda and Ajit Kumar Naik who were arrested on spot. It has been submitted that the applicant has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of confessional statement and the applicant has been made accused on the basis of confessional statement and recovery of two other mobile phone No. 8260583846 and 9083713039. It is further submitted that said two mobiles are not registered in the name of the applicant and alleged conversation is not between the co-accused and applicant rather, the conversation is between Basant and Sharat Chandra Gouda. It is mentioned that Basant and Sharat Chandra Gouda are not the accused and the location of applicant is found in Punjab as per call detail.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no independent witness is there to support the prosecution case because the alle