The refusal of evidentiary value to confessions of co-accused leads to the granting of bail under NDPS Act circumstances.

Order

13/06/2025

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. Upon interception of motorcycle being driven by two people namely Rahul and Rai Singh, 3.440 Kg opium came to be recovered. Presumably, they must have been interrogated at the spot, but nothing was disclosed regarding involvement of the petitioner at that time. After two days in police custody, it is claimed that the duo named above made a discloser to the police officer while in police custody regarding involvement of the petitioner also in procurement of contraband. There would be no evidentiary value of the discloser made above in light of the land mark judgment of the privy counsel in case of Pulukari Kotayya Vs. Kind Emperor , AIR 1947, P.C.67. This Court would desist from making any final opinion at this stage that if the confession made above by the co-accused is removed from the record or not taken into consideration, then there remains nothing to rope-in the petitioner. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. In the given circumstances, I do not feel that embargo contained under Section 37 of NDPS Act would come in way to extend benefit of bail to him. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

5. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.