Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Non-Admissibility of Co-Accused Statements in NDPS Act Cases: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that reinforces the principles of criminal jurisprudence, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to an accused in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), while making pivotal observations on the admissibility of co-accused statements.

Justice Anoop Chitkara, presiding over the matter, underscored a critical legal standpoint: “Confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible in the trial of offences under the Act.” This observation came in the backdrop of the case against Veer Singh @ Veeru, who was implicated based on a disclosure statement of the main accused.

The petitioner, Veer Singh @ Veeru, faced allegations under Sections 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act and sought bail under Section 439 of the CrPC. His plea was strongly contested by the State, highlighting his extensive criminal history and the gravity of the charges against him.

However, the Court took a nuanced approach in assessing the bail application. It noted that while the petitioner’s criminal history was significant, the bail considerations under the NDPS Act necessitated a deeper analysis. “The burden is on the petitioner to satisfy the twin conditions put in place by the Legislature under Section 37 of the NDPS Act,” remarked Justice Chitkara.

In granting bail, the Court meticulously applied the principles laid down in previous landmark judgments. It placed substantial emphasis on ensuring that the bail conditions were stringent enough to prevent any tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, as well as to safeguard society at large.

Date of Decision: 17.11.2023

Veer Singh @ Veeru VS State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News