High Court allowed second bail application under CrPC 439 in NDPS case. Court relied on Supreme Court precedent excluding Section 67 confessions as admissible evidence for bail denial, noting lack of recovery and criminal antecedents.
Released on bail against personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
---- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Darbha, Bastar (C.G.)
---- Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For State : Mr. Sameer Oraon, GA
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput,
Order on Board
17.03.2023
The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 58/2022 registered at Police Station – Darbha, Bastar (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Sections 20 (B)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive the same at an appropriate stage vide order dated 27.09.2022 passed in MCRC No. 7628 of 2022.
them and further it is alleged that the applicant has provided the amount to the main accused for purchasing of the said Ganja.
“10. It has been held in clear terms in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, that a confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act will remain inadmissible in the trial of an offence under the NDPS Act. In the teeth of the aforesaid decision, the arrests made by the petitioner-NCB, on the basis of the confession/voluntary statements of the respondents or the co-accused under Section 67 of the NDPS
Act, cannot form the basis for overturning the impugned orders releasing them on bail. The CDR details of some of the accused or the allegations of tampering of evidence on the part of one of the respondents is an aspect that will be examined at the stage of trial. For the aforesaid reason, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the orders dated 16th September, 2019, 14th January, 2020, 16th January, 2020, 19th December, 2019 and 20th January, 2020 passed in SLP (Crl.) No@ Diary No. 22702/2020, SLP (Crl.) No. 1454/2021, SLP (Crl.) No. 1465/2021, SLP (Crl.) No. 1773-74/2021 and SLP (Crl.) No. 2080/2021 respectively. The impugned orders are, accordingly, upheld and the Special Leave Petitions filed by the petitioner-NCB seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respective respondents, are dismissed as meritless.”
He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 01.08.2022, there is no criminal antecedent, trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the applicant may be granted bail.
a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.
b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
C) He shall not leave the territory of Chhattisgarh without permission of the trial Court.
It is made clear that the State is at liberty to move application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicant in the event of applicant involving himself in similar offence in future.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge
PAWAN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail when alleged offences are under NDPS Act with no recovery of contraband from his possession.
Whether Section 67 confession statement of co-accused constitutes valid ground to deny bail under NDPS Act framework.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil NaduRelied on¶14
2021 4 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
State By (NCB) Bengaluru Vs. Pallulabid Ahmad Arimutta & Anr.Relied on¶14
2022 2 Scale 14
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Jitendra Kumar Sethiya
State Of Chhattisgarh
Sachin Singh Rajput
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
