Back
PRANAY VERMA
Hemantsingh – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Pranay Verma, J. - Heard on the question of admission.
2. By this petition preferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as the Code), the petitioner has prayed for quashment of the First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime No.126/2022 registered at Police Station Narayangarh, District Mandsaur (MP); and criminal proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Special Judge (under NDPS Act), Mandsaur, District Mandsaur (MP) in Special Sessions Trial No.94/2022.
3. It is alleged that the petitioner was also involved in the aforesaid case along with other co-accused persons wherein 110 kilograms of contraband (poppy straw) has been seized by the Police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the implication of the petitioner is solely on the basis of memo of co-accused Lal Singh recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. It is the co-accused from which the recovery has been made, but no recovery has been made from the applicant. There is no direct or indirect evidence, whatsoever, to connect him with the present crime. The entire material of the charge sheet, even if taken to be true, does not disclose commission
The main legal point established is that the absence of evidence connecting the accused with the alleged offence, combined with the lack of recovery from the accused, can justify the quashment of FIR....
The court emphasized the necessity of tangible evidence in criminal cases, ruling that confessions of co-accused cannot solely support a charge without independent corroboration.
A memo prepared under section 27 of the Evidence Act cannot be the sole basis for prosecution; corroborative evidence is necessary to establish a connection to the offense.
The power to quash a FIR should be exercised sparingly and only in the rarest of rare cases. Recovery of a psychotropic substance from the accused is a ground for trial and not for quashing the FIR a....
Confessions made to police officers are inadmissible as evidence, and circumstantial evidence alone is insufficient for prosecution under narcotics law.
The court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIRs and investigations should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances, as outlined in the guidelines laid down by ....
A co-accused's confession cannot solely support a conviction without corroborating evidence, as per the principles of admissibility under the Evidence Act.
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
