The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed a petition, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for releasing him on bail in a case dated 01.05.2023, under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Court observed that the disclosure statement, if any, made under Section 67 of the Act, is inadmissible.
Brief Facts:
On 30.04.2023, the police party was on patrolling duty, and around 11:10 p.m., a vehicle was noticed, which was signaled to stop. During the search of the vehicle, underneath the co-driver seat, the police found a carry bag, which contained a black colored substance in the shape of sticks. On the basis of experience, the recovered contraband was found to be charas/cannabis. On weighed, it was found to be 2 Kg & 160 grams. After completion of all the codal formalities, both the accused persons were arrested and the investigation commenced. The bail petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that except for the disclosure statement of the accused persons, no other evidence has been collected by the Investigating Agency against the Petitioner in order to implicate him in the present case. He further contended that the investigation in the case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the petitioner, as such, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that keeping in view the gravity of the offense alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the disclosure statement of the accused persons and also on the basis of alleged call details record between the accused persons and the petitioner through their respective mobile phones. It is not in dispute that the charas/cannabis in question was never recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, rather it was allegedly recovered from accused persons Jitender and Vikas.
The Court observed that the disclosure statement, if any, made under Section 67 of the Act, is inadmissible. The confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, will remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence under the Act.
The decision of the Court:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, allowing the petition, held that the disclosure statement made by the accused cannot be read against the petitioner.
Case Title: Ram Krishan v State of H.P.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Sushil Kukreja
Case no.: Cr. MP(M) No. 2722 of 2023
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Raj Kumar Negi
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source : https://pixnio.com/free-images/science/medical-science/drug-paraphernalia-were-a-number-of-red-oblong-tablets-rows-or-lines-725x483.jpg
