Disclosure statements made by co-accused are inadmissible under the NDPS Act, and standalone financial transactions are insufficient to establish complicity or satisfy the denial of bail under the stringent provisions of Section 37 without further corroborating evidence.

Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

By way of instant petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita , prayer has been made on behalf of petitioner Adhi Atwal, who is behind bars since 27.12.2025, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.165/2025, dated 29.09.2025, under Sections 21 and 29 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur.

2. Respondent/State has filed status report and ASI Lalit Kumar, IO, PS Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, has come present along with record. Record perused and returned.

3. Close security of record/status report reveals that on 29.09.2025 at 04:30 pm, Police party present near Toll Plaza, Baloh, Bilaspur, stopped one car bearing No.T0825PB5265E, Honda Amaze, for checking. On inquiry, driver of the vehicle disclosed to the Police that vehicle in question is a Taxi and the same was hired from Amritsar to Kullu. Since persons sitting on the rear seat got perplexed, Police deemed it necessary to conduct their search as well as of the vehicle and allegedly, in the presence of independent witnesses, recovered one bag, which at relevant time was kept on the lap of one of the occupant of the car, containing 518.4 grams of chitta/heroin. Since no plausible explanation ever came to be rendered on record qua possession of aforesaid quantity of contraband, Police, after having completed necessary codal formalities, lodged FIR detailed hereinabove and arrested both the occupants of the car, namely Abhi Kumar and Rahul. Since above named persons during investigation revealed that contraband recovered from them was to be delivered to persons namely Aditya and Girja Sharma, Police also arrested Aditya and Girja Sharma, who further disclosed to the Police that present bail petitioner Adhi Atwal deals in narcotics and they have purchased afore quantity of contraband from him. Co accused Aditya disclosed to the Police that sum of ₹1,00,500/- was deposited by him in the bank account of Adhi Atwal. In the afore background, present bail petitioner, i.e. Adhi Atwal, also came to be roped in the present case and he is behind bars since 27.12.2025.

4. Since investigation in the case at hand is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings for grant of regular bail.

5. Ms. Kanta Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioner, vehemently argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated. She states that there is no evidence adduced on record to demonstrate that the contraband was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, rather, same was recovered from the conscious possession of co-accused namely Abhi Kmar and Rahul and petitioner herein has been roped merely on the basis of statement made by co-accused Aditya and Girja Sharma, which is otherwise not admissible in law. In support of her afore contention, she placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu , (2021) 4 SCC 1.

6. While fairly acknowledging factum with regard to filing of Challan in the competent Court of law, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that though nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, but keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by him, he does not deserve any leniency and as such, his prayer for grant of regular bail deserve