KAMLESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant bail applications have been filed by the petitioners Kamlesh S/o Shri Mangilal and Dilip S/o Shri Prahlad under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C against the order impugned dtd. 7/1/2023 passed by learned court below in connection with FIR No.01/2022 registered at Police Station Rathanjana, District Pratapgarh for the offence(s) under Ss. 8/15 & 29 of NDPS Act.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a false case have been foisted against the petitioner. They have nothing to do with the alleged offences and no useful purpose would be served by keeping them behind the bars. It is the admitted case of the prosecution that neither the petitioners were found present at the crime scene nor any incriminating material or contraband was recovered from their possession. They have been made accused on the strength of confessional statement made by the co-accused during police custody which is otherwise not admissible in evidence by virtue of Ss. 25 and 26 of Indian Evidence Act.

(3.) The said disclosure statement does not come within the ambit of Sec. 27 of Indian Evidence Act. It has been propounded by the Privy Council in the case of Pulukuri Kottaya & Ors. Vs. Emperor (AIR 1947 PC 67) that since nothing was discovered or recovered, the disclosure statement made while in custody which distinctly connects the accused-petitioners with the commission of the crime cannot betaken as an admissible piece of evidence. Since nothing is there on record from which involvement of the accused can be presumed, therefore, the condition under Sec. 37 of the NDPS Act do not come in way of releasing the petitioners on bail.