##PAGE1##

$~16

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P.(NDPS) 19/2025 & CRL.M.A. 38498-38499/2025

GAURAV TOKAS .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Dhruv Yadav, Advocate.

versus

STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State

along with SI Rohit.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

1. This petition under Sections 438 and 442 read with Section 528 of

the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sahita, 2023, “BNSS” (corresponding to Sections

397 and 401 read with 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, “CrPC”

assails order dated 22^nd September, 2025, whereby charges have been

directed to be framed against the Petitioner in FIR No. 205/2023 dated 22^nd

August, 2023, registered at P.S. Crime Branch, Delhi, for offences under

Sections 20/22/25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,

1985, “NDPS Act”. Upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed, whereby

the Petitioner has been charged under Sections 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. The impugned order proceeds on the view that there exists sufficient

CRL.REV.P.(NDPS) 19/2025 Page 1 of 6

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:51:36

material to frame charge against the Petitioner, principally under Section 29

NDPS Act, in relation to the alleged conspiracy involving co-accused

Lakshay Jain @ Lj (Accused No. 11). The Petitioner seeks interference in

revision and prays for discharge.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the intervening night of 21^st

and 22^nd August, 2023, co-accused Sahil Sharma @ Maxx was apprehended

in a vehicle and recoveries were effected of contraband including MDMA,

charas and ganja. The investigation thereafter expanded on the basis of

disclosures and follow-up actions, leading to the arrest of several persons

alleged to be part of a network dealing in narcotic substances, including

delivery riders, suppliers and other associates.

4. So far as the Petitioner is concerned, the case set up by the

prosecution is not of any direct recovery from him. The prosecution asserts

his complicity in the conspiracy on the strength of (i) chat material

recovered during investigation, stated to reflect communication between the

Petitioner and co-accused Lakshay Jain; (ii) financial transactions between

the Petitioner and Lakshay Jain; and (iii) disclosure statements forming part

of the prosecution’s version.

5. Mr. Dhruv Yadav, counsel for the Petitioner, contends that the

impugned order suffers from serious infirmities and that even the threshold

for framing charge is not met. The submissions, in substance, are these:

5.1. The prosecution case against the Petitioner rests essentially on

disclosure statements, chat extracts recovered from the device of Lakshay

Jain and certain bank transactions. None of these creates a nexus between

the Petitioner and the recovered contraband or of any procurement of Ganja

“from abroad”.

CRL.REV.P.(NDPS) 19/2025 Page 2 of 6

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:51:36

5.2. The disclosure/confessional statements of the co-accused recorded in

custody are inadmissible, particularly in view of the decision of the Supreme

Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1., and cannot be used to

sustain a charge.

5.3. The chat material does not contain any incriminating content

connecting the Petitioner with procurement, storage, transport or financing

of contraband. The bank transfers, by themselves, are equivocal and do not

establish any illegal purpose.

5.4. The Trial Court discharged certain co-accused (as recorded in the

impugned order) on the reasoning that, if the disclosure statements are kept

aside, the remaining material is insuffi