SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DINESH MAHESHWARI, ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.
State of West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Singh @ Rakesh Kumar Singh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 923 of 2022, SLP (Crl.) No. 9470 of 2021
Decided On : 11-07-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accusations against the respondent involve financing illicit drug trafficking. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments presented for and against bail of the respondent. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court’s analysis of evidence and statement contradictions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. assessment of bail terms and legal justifications for the high court's decision. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. final dismissal of appeal with observations on trial proceedings. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
DINESH MAHESHWARI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal by the State of West Bengal is directed against the order dated 24.11.2021, as passed by the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court in CRM No. 3152 of 2021, whereby the respondent, an accused of the offences under Sections 21 (b)/29/27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 19851 [Hereinafter also referred to as ‘the NDPS Act’] has been ordered to be enlarged on bail with certain additional conditions, apart from bail bonds and sureties.
3. Though, the validity of the order granting bail is in question in this appeal and final determination of all the contentious issues is not called for but, looking to the nature of rival submissions made before us as also the nature of accusations concerning the respondent, a somewhat lengthy reference to the relevant background aspects is rather inevitable.
4. The matter in issue in this appeal has its genesis in FIR No. 65 of 2021 dated 19.02.2021, registered at New Alipore Police Station, Kolkata, initially in respect of offences under Sections 21 (b)/29 NDPS Act; after recovery of 76 grams of cocaine from a motorcar bearing Registration No. WB-06P-0233 with three occupants, namely, Somnath Chattopadhyay (security guard), Prabir Kumar De and Pamela Goswami. However, on 23.02.2021, the respondent Rakesh Singh @ Rakesh Kumar Singh was arrested in this matter with the accusations essentially pertaining to the offence under Section 27A of the NDPS Act, i.e. financing illicit trafficking in contrabands and harbouring offenders and with the allegations that he got the contraband procured and then got it planted in the vehicle occupied by the aforesaid three persons.
5. It is the accusations concerning the respondent which forms the core of the subject-matter of this appeal. Thus, we may take note of the salient features of the prosecution case against the respondent as follows:
5.2. According to the prosecution, the respondent, thereafter, engaged the co-accused Amrit Raj Singh, who allured the said Prabir Kumar De and Pamela Goswami to attend a meeting with a senior political leader at New Alipore area on 19.02.2021 in relation with the ensuing Legislative Assembly elections and the said Amrit Raj Singh went to the house of the respondent on 18.02.2021 and was also seen using the vehicle of the respondent.
5.3. It has further been alleged that on 19.02.2021, the said Prabir Kumar De and Pamela Goswami, accompanied by their security guard Somnath Chattopadhyay, picked up Amrit Raj Singh in their vehicle and proceeded for the meeting scheduled at New Alipore area. Upon reaching the place of occurrence, Amrit Raj Singh, on the pretext of changing his clothes, stayed in the vehicle while Prabir Kumar De, Pamela Goswami,
State of Kerala and Others vs. Rajesh and Others
State of U.P. vs. Amarmani Tripathi
Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow vs. Md. Nawaz Khan
The court confirmed that under Section 37 NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to re-offend.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the gravity of drug trafficking offences and the legislative intent to p....
The court established that for bail under the NDPS Act, there must be corroborative evidence beyond confessions to justify detention.
Indefinite detention based on uncorroborated confessions is unjustifiable; the prosecution must provide additional evidence to warrant continued incarceration.
The judgment establishes the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need to satisfy reasonable grounds for believing in the innocence of the accused and ensuring t....
The rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act apply in cases involving trade in commercial quantity of narcotics. The court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accus....
The court established that confessions of co-accused require corroboration to justify detention, emphasizing the need for evidence in bail considerations under the NDPS Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.