22.04.2025
Heard Mr. H. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.
P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, praying for grant of bail to the
accused/petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with Special NDPS Case No.
40/2022 arising out of Patharkandi P. S. Case No. 69/2022, under Sections
21(C)/25/29 of NDPS, which is pending before the Court of learned Sessions Judge,
Sribhumi.
3. The scanned copy of the Trial Court Record along with the Case Diary has
already been received and I have perused the same.
4. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, that the
accused/petitioner is innocent and not at all involved in the alleged offence. The
petitioner is not a named accused in the FIR, and from the statements made in the
charge sheet, it appears that his name has been mentioned solely on the basis of
suspicion, showing him as an absconder. Also, during the investigation, the police
never inquired about the present petitioner, and thus, he was unaware of the alleged
offence. Subsequently, on the strength of the NBWA issued by the learned Trial Court,
the petitioner was arrested on 12.12.2023 and has been in custody since then, solely
on the basis of the statement of the co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the
NDPS Act. It is, however, a settled position of law that the statement of a co-accused
or a voluntary statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is not admissible
during trial and cannot form the basis of a conviction, as laid down by the Hon’ble
Page No.# 3/7
Apex Court in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu [(2021) 4 SCC 1]. In that case,
it was held that the statement of a co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS
Act is not tenable in the eyes of law and cannot be the basis of conviction.