The confession of a co-accused is inadmissible as evidence against another accused under the NDPS Act, justifying the grant of bail.

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused No.2 in Spl.C.C.No.740/2025 pending before the Court of 33^rd Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.336/2024 registered by HSR Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (c), 22(c), 23(a) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, referred to as "NDPS Act"), is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.336/2024 was registered by HSR Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for the aforesaid offences against Abhishek Gowda and the petitioner based on the first information received on 09.09.2024 from Mohammed Mukaram, Police Officer attached to Anti-Narcotics Squad, CCB, Bengaluru.

4. During the course of investigation, petitioner herein was arrested on 13.09.2024 and subsequently, remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, chargesheet has been filed against two persons and petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in the chargesheet. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.2363/2025 was rejected on 08.04.2025. Therefore, he is before this Court seeking regular bail.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except the confession statement of accused No.1 in whose name the suspected parcel has arrived from Belgium, there is absolutely no other material to connect the petitioner to the crime in the present case. Investigation of the case is completed and chargesheet is filed. In the criminal case which was registered earlier against the petitioner, he has been enlarged on bail. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

6. Per contra, learned HCGP, who was granted time to make her submission, after getting necessary instructions, submits that except the confession statement of accused No.1, there is no other material to connect the petitioner to the crime.

7. Submissions made by both the sides are placed on record.

8. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that based on credible information received on 09.09.2024, the first informant, after obtaining necessary permission from his higher officers, had conducted a raid to the office premises of a private company in which accused No.1 was working and had recovered a parcel which was addressed in the name of accused No.1, shipped from Belgium and in the said suspected parcel, contraband articles MDMA Ecstasy weighing 469 grams and LSD weighing 19 grams were found. Thereafter, accused No.1 was arrested and the aforesaid contraband articles were seized under a panchanama.

9. It appears that during the course of investigation, accused No.1 has confessed that the parcel in which contraband articles were found was booked in his name by the petitioner herein, who is his friend and co-employee in a company in which he was working earlier. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is arraigned as accused in the present case.

10. Learned HCGP, on instructions has submitted that except the confession statement of accused No.1, there is no other material to connect the petitioner to the crime in the present case. In the crime registered earlier against accused, he has already been enlarged on bail.