SUKHPRITSINGH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.B.Rana, learned counsel for the Petitioner.

(2.) This petition is directed against the order dtd. 2/9/2022 passed in Special (NDPS) Case No.3/2021, by which learned 4 th Additional Sessions Judge, Palanpur by overwhelming the objections raised by the defense counsel, permitted the prosecution to ask certain questions as mentioned in para 7 of the deposition.

(3.) Mr. Rana submits that, the Petitioner has been charged for the offence under Ss. 8(C) and 20(B)(iii) C of NDPS Act. It is the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that at the relevant point of time, in presence of investigating agency, the accused have disclosed the source of narcotic contraband. It is in this context, relying upon the judgment of Anil Surendrasingh Yadav Vs. State of Gujarat [(2020) 3 GLR 1983], Mr. Rana submits that, the statement in form of confession made by the accused before panchas while he was in police custody, would be hit by Sec. 26 of the Evidence Act. He also submits that, while allowing prosecution to ask certain questions as referred to above, trial Court has failed to appreciate the settled proposition of law and therefore, the order in question is perverse and requires to be quashed and set aside.