DHARMENDRA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A 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 confessional statement of an accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 can be used against him or against co-accused or a person can be convicted only on the basis of such statement, is involve in all these petitions, therefore, they are heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

(2.) All the petitioners have invoked extraordinary powers of this Court conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. asserting that they are being prosecuted only on the basis of totally inadmissible evidence i.e. the confessional/disclosure statement made by the co-accused to the police under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, which is blatant infringement of their fundamental right and cannot be allowed to continue, therefore, their prosecution be quashed.

(3.) Irrespective of the fact that the cases of the petitioners are under the different laws like M.P. Excise Act, 1915 or the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (for short NDPS, Act), but in all these petitions, complicity of the petitioners is based only on the information given by the coaccused to the police, which has been recorded under Section 27 of the Act of 1872, but has not led to discovery of any fact.