Summary
The Court declined to overturn bail for respondents whose alleged involvement rested primarily on Section 67 NDPS confessions and associated call records, applying Tofan Singh on inadmissibility of confessional statements. It reached a different result for Mohammed Afzal in the second case, where substantial commercial-quantity recovery from premises occupied by him independently distinguished his position. Parity with other accused could not bypass Section 37. His bail was cancelled with surrender within two weeks; the remaining challenges failed. All observations were confined to bail review.
Issues
- Whether inadmissible Section 67 confessions and the other material justified overturning the bail orders.
- Whether commercial-quantity recovery independently distinguished one respondent and defeated his plea of parity.
Provisions considered
- Sections 37 and 67, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Confessional statements under Section 67 could not sustain reversal of the relevant bail grants; separate commercial-quantity recovery attracted Section 37 and defeated parity for one respondent. (¶ 7-11)
Held
- Applying Tofan Singh, confessional statements recorded under Section 67 remained inadmissible in an NDPS trial. The prosecution’s predominant reliance on such statements did not justify overturning the bail orders where no substantial independent connecting material appeared available at arrest. The call-record and alleged evidence-tampering issues mentioned were left for trial. (¶ 8-10)
- Mohammed Afzal’s bail in the second case stood differently because substantial commercial quantities were allegedly recovered from rented premises occupied by him. The High Court overlooked that independent material and wrongly extended parity. In view of conscious-possession findings for the limited bail enquiry and Section 37, that bail grant could not stand. (¶¶ 5, 11)
- The challenge in SLP(Crl.) No.1569/2021 succeeded and that respondent had to surrender to the Sessions Court or Special Judge within two weeks. The other specified special-leave petitions were dismissed and their bail orders upheld. These findings determined bail alone, without deciding the pending trial’s merits. (¶ 10-13)
Result
Other bail challenges dismissed; bail of Mohammed Afzal in SLP(Crl.) No.1569/2021 cancelled, with surrender within two weeks; trial merits left open.