Uttarakhand High Court
Saleem vs State Of Uttarakhand on 15 March, 2023
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
First Bail Application No. 514 of 2023
Saleem ........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the NCB.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
Applicant Saleem is in judicial custody in
NCB/Case Crime No.1 of 2023, under Section 8/22C/29
of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 ("the Act"), Police Station NCB Sub Zone, District-
Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. According to the Narcotics Control Bureau
(NCB) case, narcotic substances in commercial quantity
were recovered from the co-accused on 17.01.2023. The
co-accused, from whom narcotic substances were
recovered, revealed it to the NCB officers that they
purchased the seized narcotic drugs from the applicant
and another co-accused Sahib. Thereafter, when the
applicant was interrogated, he revealed that he got those
narcotic drugs from one Rehmaan.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the
applicant that merely on the basis of the statement of the
co-accused, the applicant has been apprehended; nothing
was recovered from him; there is no other evidence
against the applicant.
5. Learned counsel for the NCB would submit
that it is a case of recovery of commercial quantity of
narcotic substances in commercial quantity. It is
submitted that in the present case, provisions of Section
37 of the Act are attracted. Learned counsel would also
submit that based on the disclosure of the persons
arrested, when the applicant was interrogated, he
revealed that, in fact, he had got those narcotic drugs
from one Rehmaan and they were telephonically in
contact also.
6. Learned counsel for the NCB has relied on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in SLP
No.5176 of 2020, Union of India Vs. Billu Pal, to argue
that while considering bail, the provisions of Section 67 of
the Act are also to be taken not of.
7. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is
not expected of.
8. Section 67 of the Act permits an empowered
officer to call for information or production of documents
or examine any person during the course of that enquiry
in connection with the contravention of any provision of
the Act.
9. What would be the effect of information given
by the person has been discussed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of
Tamil Nadu, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 882. In Para 404 of the
judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that, "A
confessional statement does not automatically result
in the conviction of an accused offender. Such
statements have to be tendered and proved in
accordance with the law. The evidentiary value of the
statement which is confessional in nature has to be
weighed and assessed by the court at the trial."
10. It is true that the provisions of bail under the
provisions of the Act are also guided by Section 37 of the
Act and in offence involving commercial quantity, bail
may not be granted until the Court is satisfied that there
are no ground for believing that the accused is not guilty
of such offences and that he is not likely to commit any
offence, while on bail.
11. Admittedly, in the instant case, nothing was
recovered, as such, from the applicant. Narcotic
substances in commercial quantity were recovered from
the co-accused. He named the applicant as the person,
from whom, he purchased the narcotic drugs and further,
the NCB relies on a confession made by the co-accused.
12. These all would fall for scrutiny during
investigation or the trial, as the case may be. Merely on
the basis of the statements of the co-accused, a finding of
guilt may not be recorded. Having considered, this Court
is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
13. The bail application is allowed.
14. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his
executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable
sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the
court concerned.
(Ravindra Maithani, J)
15.03.2023
Ravi Bisht
