Bail Granted to Mahender Singh as Co-Accused Statements and Financial Records Deemed Insufficient Evidence
In a significant judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted bail to Mahender Singh, who was implicated in a case involving narcotics under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, primarily based on the statements of a co-accused and financial transactions, was insufficient to establish a prima facie case against Singh.
The case revolved around an FIR registered at Police Station Manpura, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, alleging that Singh had a role in storing charas at the clinic of co-accused Vishwajit Mandal. The prosecution's case heavily relied on Mandal's confession and call detail records showing transactions between Mandal and Singh.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla, presiding over the matter, highlighted that confessions made by co-accused are inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, and statements made during police investigations cannot be used as substantive evidence. This aligns with precedents set by the Supreme Court, which stress that a confession by a co-accused cannot substantiate charges against another without corroborative evidence.
The judgment also scrutinized the financial transactions cited by the prosecution. Although Rs. 1,48,360 was transferred from Singh to Mandal, the court noted that financial transactions alone do not conclusively link Singh to the alleged crime, referencing recent judgments which emphasize the necessity for more robust evidence in such cases.
Furthermore, the court underscored the completion of investigations and the scheduling of witness examinations, indicating that further detention of Singh would not serve any significant purpose. The bail conditions imposed include restrictions to prevent witness intimidation, ensuring Singh's presence at trial, and stipulating his compliance with local authorities regarding his whereabouts.
The ruling is a critical reminder of the judiciary's role in balancing individual rights with legal obligations, especially in complex cases involving narcotics. It reinforces the principle that bail should not be denied based solely on unsubstantiated claims or inadmissible evidence.
Bottom Line:
Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) - Bail granted to the petitioner on the ground that statements made by the co-accused and financial transactions alone are not sufficient evidence to connect the petitioner to the commission of the offence.
Statutory provision(s): Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Sections 20 and 29, Indian Evidence Act Section 25, Cr.P.C. Section 162
Mahender Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc id # 2843169
