Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High 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.

Similar News