Confessions recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible in trial, necessitating quashing of proceedings lacking corroborative evidence.

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel Smt.Laksha Kalappa B., appearing for the petitioner and the learned CGC Sri.Gowthamdev C. Ullal, appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

"(i) Quash the complaint and charge sheet / information report in NCB F.No.48/1/29/2022/BZU filed in SPL.C. No.2076/2023 pending on the file of the Hon'be XXXIII Additional City Civil and S.Spl. Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-33) vide ANNEXURE B and consequently quash the entire proceedings in SplC.No.2076/2023 to the extent they relate to the Petitioner herein, on the file of the Hon'ble XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Spl. Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-33).

(ii) Issue any other order and grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."

3. This Court, in Crl.P.No.3/2024 qua the co-accused has quashed the proceedings owing to the fact that they were drawn into the web of crime only on voluntary statements, which were contrary to law, without there being any corroborative material apart from the said statement. The petitioner being co-accused is entitled to the same relief that is granted to the other accused. This Court, has held as follows:

"8. The afore-narrated facts of the petitioner being drawn into the web of crime is not disputed. How he gets into the crime is what is required to be reiterated. The respondent is said to have received information of a parcel being sent from Shree Maruthi Courier Service. They were 4 in number. All the 4 parcels is said to have contained ganja. On ganja being found in those 4 parcels, the police registers a suo motu case against several accused, all the accused are before this Court. After registration of the crime, the accused were interrogated and their statements were recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Recording of the statement led to the filing of a complaint against the petitioner/accused No.3 before this Court in the subject petition.

9. The undisputed facts, in the case at hand, are that the name of the petitioner was not found on the envelope that allegedly contained ganja. What was found was the telephone number of the petitioner on the cover which led the police to interrogate and record statement of the petitioner, which forms part of the complaint so filed for the afore-quoted offences. Apart from the confession statement recorded by the respondent-police of the petitioner, there is no other material that can pin down the petitioner, as parcel though contained ganja, the address was not that of the petitioner nor it was in the name of the petitioner, except the mysterious printing of the telephone number on the cover. The petitioner is said to have confessed to the crime while recording the statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The complaint so filed against the petitioner read as follows:

“on the basis of the voluntary statement of Mr. Saikat Bhattacharrya S/o Sukanti Bhattacharrya Dated 30.11.2022, 01.12.2022, 02.12.2022 and the material objects seized i.e. 109 Grams of Ganja on dated 30.11.2022 was arrested by Smt. Sheeja Sivaraman, Junior Intelligence Officer (CW-2) on dated 02.12.2022 at 12:10 Hrs. for committing offences u/s 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(A), 27, 28 and 29 of the NDPS Act (Ex…… Page Nos.44). Jamatalashi were done by CW-2 in respect of Mr.Saikat Bhattacharrya S/o Sukanti Bhattacharrya immediately after his arrest on dated 02.12.2022 (Ex…… Page Nos.45).”

A perusal at the complaint would indicate that no recovery of ganja was made from the hands of the petitioner.

10. It becomes apposite to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu , (2021) 4 SCC 1 wherein the Apex Court holds as follows:

“…. …. ….

158. We answer the reference by stating:

158.1. That the officers who are invested with powers under Section 53 of the