GANPAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

(2.) The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 509/2008 of Police Station Kotwali Chittorgarh, District Chittorgarh for the offences punishable under Ss. 8/18 and 29 of NDPS Act. He has preferred this second bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story, the police recorded 3 kgs. opium from coaccused Hema Ram. It is submitted that in the interrogation, the said co-accused informed the police that he procured the said narcotic contraband from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the police have filed charge-sheet against the petitioner only on the basis of information supplied by co-accused Hema Ram during police custody. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now the statements of Investigating Officer Mr. Gulab Singh have also been recorded before the trial court as PW-19, wherein he has also specifically stated that he was unable to collect any evidence to prove that the petitioner and co-accused Hema Ram were connected to each other in any manner or are in contact at any point of time before or after the alleged recovery. It is submitted that it is settled that any information supplied by a person in police custody is not admissible as evidence in law.