Allegations In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Specific And Supported By Foundation Facts To Avoid Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Sentence To Period Already Undergone Citing Medical Condition And Expression Of Remorse Qualification Of '10+2 System' Cannot Be Equated With Other Certifications Absent An Equivalence Clause: Supreme Court Essential Qualifications In Recruitment Cannot Be Diluted Or Subject To Judicial Equivalence: Supreme Court Court Has Discretion To Decide Genuineness Of Signature By Comparison; Not Essential To Invoke Expert Opinion In All Cases: Supreme Court Civil Disputes Cannot Be Converted Into Criminal Offences To Recover Money: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Section 420 IPC Taxing Authorities Must Classify Goods Based On Form At Time Of Sale, Not End Use: Supreme Court Suit For Declaration Of Status Must Seek Consequential Relief To Avoid Bar Of Proviso: Allahabad High Court Illegal Detention | Police Failure To Maintain CCTV Footage Invokes Adverse Presumption Under Sec 119 BSA Against State: Allahabad High Court Section 138 NI Act | Accused Rebuts Presumption By Proving Intimation Of Misplaced Cheque To Bank And Lack Of Documentation For Alleged Settlement: Andhra Pradesh High Court Garnishee Proceedings Under CPC | Disputed Debt Cannot Be Summarily Adjudicated Without Leading Evidence: Bombay High Court Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act 2022 | Magistrate’s Power Under Section 5 To Direct DNA Profiling Is Not Conditional Upon Consent: Calcutta High Court Conviction Based On 'Assumption And Presumption' Cannot Be Sustained: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Limitation Act | Suit For Specific Performance Must Be Filed Within Reasonable Time Even If No Date For Performance Is Fixed: Delhi High Court Enrolment As Advocate | Bar Council Must Consider 'Equivalent Qualifications' Under Rule 4(a) Rules Of Legal Education: Karnataka High Court Section 482 BNSS | Pre-Arrest Bail Is Not A Matter Of Course; Must Show Special Case For Invoking Extraordinary Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Hindu Succession Act | A Co-parcener Cannot Alienate Entire Property; Non-Impleaded Legal Heir Not Bound By Previous Decree: Madras High Court Purchaser During Pendency Of Suit Bound By Compromise Decree, Cannot Treat It As Void In Collateral Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1-A CPC | In Partition Suits, Defendants Asserting A Share Can Seek Transposition If Original Plaintiffs Withdraw: Patna High Court Section 69 BNS | Suppression Of Subsisting Marriage Or Live-In Relationship During Marriage Proposal Constitutes 'Deceitful Means': Kerala High Court Anticipatory Bail | Mere Apprehension Of Investigating Agency Is Insufficient To Deny Bail Without Demonstrating Necessity Of Custodial Interrogation: Telangana High Court Income Tax Evasion | Criminal Prosecution Under Section 276C IT Act Cannot Sustain Once Foundation Assessment Order Is Set Aside: Punjab & Haryana High Court Election Petition Must Be Presented By Petitioner In Person, Non-Compliance Renders It Liable To Summary Dismissal: Supreme Court Absence Of Recovery Or Evidence Of Stolen Property Precludes Conviction Under Section 394 IPC: Supreme Court

High Court Grants Bail In NDPS: Confession Before NCB Officers Deemed Inadmissible

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, extends bail in NRX drug trafficking case, emphasizes non-commercial quantity and reliance on Supreme Court precedents.

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, has granted bail to Abhishek Mishra, implicated in the illegal possession and trafficking of NRX drugs. The court's decision, delivered by Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, highlights the inadmissibility of confessional statements made to NCB officers and the non-commercial quantity of the drugs involved.

Abhishek Mishra was arrested on October 7, 2023, in connection with the illegal shipment of NRX drugs, including Alprazolam, Tramadol, and Buprenorphine tablets. The arrest followed a raid on September 8, 2023, based on a tip-off received by the Deputy Narcotics Commissioner in Lucknow. The seized consignment, intended for a fake medical firm, was intercepted at Trackon Courier Service. Mishra, a courier supplier, was accused based on the confession of a co-accused, recorded by NCB officers.

Non-Commercial Quantity Consideration: The court examined the statutory conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and relevant Supreme Court rulings. It noted the seized Alprazolam tablets attributed to Mishra weighed approximately 14.1 grams, classifying them as a non-commercial quantity. This classification influenced the court’s decision to grant bail. "The applicant, without prior criminal history and having a role similar to the co-accused granted bail, is entitled to bail on parity basis," the court observed.

Admissibility of Confessional Statements: Central to the court's decision was the inadmissibility of confessions made to NCB officers under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Tofan Singh, the court stated, "Confessions to NCB officers are inadmissible under Article 20(3) of the Constitution." This legal precedent significantly impacted the case.

To ensure trial cooperation and prevent misuse, the court imposed several conditions, including a personal bond, two sureties, mandatory attendance at critical trial phases, and a prohibition on leaving the country without court permission. Any breach of these conditions could result in bail revocation.

The judgment detailed the principles for evaluating evidence under the NDPS Act. The court emphasized that Mishra’s implication rested solely on an inadmissible confession by a co-accused. "The applicant’s involvement appears tenuous at this stage, and thus, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply," the court noted.

Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan remarked, "The quantity of drugs attributed to the applicant is non-commercial, and considering the Supreme Court's interpretation, the confession before NCB officers is inadmissible."

The High Court's decision to grant bail to Abhishek Mishra underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding constitutional protections and ensuring that convictions in drug trafficking cases are based on admissible evidence. This ruling is likely to influence future NDPS Act cases, particularly regarding the admissibility of confessional statements and the interpretation of non-commercial quantities.

 

Date of Decision:30th May 2024

Abhishek Mishra vs. Union of India Through Central Bureau Of Narcotics Lko.

Latest Legal News