IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
Rajat Kumar alias Gaurav - Appellant
Vs.
Narcotics Control Bureau and Another - Respondents
First Bail Application No. 1717 of 2021 With First Bail Application No. 202, 617 of 2022
Decided On : 24-08-2022
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Bail Applications - Sections 8/22/27A/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Fact of the Case:
The applicants were seeking bail in connection with a case involving the possession and trafficking of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. The prosecution presented evidence of recovered injections and mobile phone communications linking the accused individuals.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the Act were inadmissible as evidence. It emphasized the importance of personal liberty and granted bail to the applicants, noting that detention during trial is not meant to be punitive.
Issues: The admissibility of confessional statements under Section 67 of the Act, the presence of the accused at the spot of seizure, and the potential for tampering with evidence were key issues.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the inadmissibility of confessional statements, the absence of physical possession of the seized contraband by the applicants, and the lack of potential evidence tampering due to the filing of complaints and custody of the accused.
Final Decision: The bail applications were allowed, and the applicants were granted bail with specific conditions to attend court, refrain from influencing witnesses, and not leave the country without court permission.
JUDGMENT :
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
These three Bail Applications have been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with NCB Crime No.05/NCB/DDN/2020 (Special Sessions Trial No.136 of 2021, “Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Dehradun vs. Ankit alias Kaka and Others”), registered with NCB Sub-Zone, Dehradun for the offence under Sections 8/22/27A/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act 1985”). All these three bail applications arise from one crime number i.e. NCB Crime No.05, therefore, these bail applications are being considered and decided by this common order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, the learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau (in short, ‘NCB’) submitted that on 24.12.2020 at around 12:30 hours, a secret information was received by Ashu Sharma, Junior Intelligence Officer of NCB, that two persons, namely, Ankit alias Kaka along with motorcycle bearing No.UK16C9943 and Vipin Kumar son of Satish Kumar along with motorcycle bearing No.UK07DB5409 were going to sell drug injections, Diazepam, Buprenorphine and Phenargan to a person, near Tibetten Settlement Office, Lakhanwala, Herbartpur, Dehrdaun. On the basis of the said secret information, 150 ampoules of injections (Buprenorphine – 50 Nos, Diazepam– 50 Nos. and Phenargan– 50 Nos.) were recovered from the possession of the co-accused Ankit alias Kaka and 294 ampoules of injections (Buprenorphine – 98 Nos., Diazepam – 98 Nos. and Phenargan – 98 Nos.) were recovered from the possession of Vipin Kumar on 24.12.2020 at near Dhogu Yugualling, Tibetan Settlement Office, Lakhanwala, Herbartpur, Dehrdaun. Consequently, notices under Section 67 of the Act, 1985, were issued to Ankit alias Kaka and Vipin Kumar. In his voluntary statements, recorded on 24.12.2020 and 25.12.2020, before Mr. Ashu Sharma, Ankit alias Kaka had confessed his guilt that the said injections were recovered from his possession which he had purchased from Vipin Kumar to sell to various boys of Dehradun. Thereafter, he was arrested on 25.12.2020 at 15:30 hours.
4. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, the learned counsel for NCB, submitted that the statements of Vipin Kumar son of Satish Kumar was recorded under Section 67 of the Act, 1985 on 24.12.2020 and 25.12.2020. In his statements, he stated that the said recovered injections were purchased by him from a person, namely, Gaurav alias Rajat Kumar (present applicant). Vipin Kumar was arrested on 25.12.2020 at 15:40 hours.
5. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, the learned counsel for NCB, further submitted that on 25.05.2021, house of Rajat Kumar was searched, but, during the search, no narcotic drug or psychotropic substance was found. At that time, Rajat Kumar was not present. A notice under Section 67 of the Act, 1985 was issued to him. He appeared at NCB Office on 27.05.2021. His statement was recorded. In his statement, he stated that he had purchased the injections from Veer Medical Store, Thana Bhawan, Shamli. Vipin Kumar, the present applicant – accused, was the owner of Veer Medical Store. Rajat Kumar was arrested on 27.05.2021.
6. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, the learned counsel for NCB, submitted that a notice under Section 67 of the Act, 1985 was issued to Vipin Kumar (present applicant). On 02.06.2021, Vipin Kumar (present applicant) appeared at NCB Office and recorded his voluntary statement. In his voluntary statement, he did not accept his involvement in the trafficking of Diazepam, Buprenorphine injections, but, at the same time he accepted that he used to sell Phenargan injections to Rajat Kumar (co-accused) without prescription slips of doctors. A mobile phone of Rajat Kumar was seized. The said mobile phone was sent to Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh. On analyzing the forensic report, chatting regarding the purchase and sale of Diazepam and Buprenorphine injections were found between Rajat Kumar (Mobile Number 8057387980) and Vipin Kumar (pr
AI
The inadmissibility of confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of innocence and the importance of adhering to legal procedures, such as drawing samples in accordance with the Standing Order, in ....
Parameters of bail available under Section 37 of NDPS Act are narrow--Length of period of custody or fact that charge-sheet has been filed and trial has commenced are by themselves not considerations....
The limited purpose of examining bail applications under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is to focus on the availability of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offences ....
The court ruled that serious charges under the NDPS Act warranted the application of strict bail conditions, emphasizing the organized nature of the alleged narcotics trafficking and concerns regardi....
The inadmissibility of confessions made to NDPS officers by the accused and the overriding of the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act by the fundamental right guaranteed under ....
Prolonged detention without trial violates the right to a speedy trial, allowing bail despite statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act.
Point of Law : Service providers as defined under Section 79 of the Technology Act but the said business was only a facade and camouflage for more sinister activity. In this situation, Section 79 wil....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.