VIKRAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As common question of law, as to whether information given by an accused in his disclosure statement before the police recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of 1872") which does not lead to discovery of any fact in pursuant thereto, is admissible in law more particularly against any co-accused or as to whether a person can be convicted only on the basis of such information or such confessional statement given by himself or by co-accused, is involve in all these petitions, therefore, they are heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

(2.) All the petitioners have challenged the order framing charge under Section 8/18 read with 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity here-in-after referred to as the NDPS Act) invoking revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. asserting that they are being prosecuted only on the basis of totally inadmissible evidence i.e. the disclosure statement made by the co-accused to the police, which is blatant infringement of their fundamental right and cannot be allowed to continue, therefore, the charges framed against them be quashed and they be discharged.

(3.) In all these petitions, complicity of the petitioners is based only on the information given by the co-accused or their own statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to the police, but has not led to discovery of any fact.