The Karnataka High Court has recently quashed criminal proceedings against a 25-year-old man, Saikat Bhatacharyya, who had been charged under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) after a parcel containing ganja was seized from a courier company with his mobile number printed on it.

The Single-Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna ruled in favour of Bhatacharyya, dismissing the charges under multiple sections of the NDPS Act, including Section 8(c), read with Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 23(a), 27, 27A, 28, and 29.

"Apart from the confession statement recorded by the respondent-police of the petitioner, there is no other material that can pin down the petitioner, as parcel though contained ganja, the address was not that of the petitioner nor it was in the name of the petitioner, except the mysterious printing of the telephone number on the cover", the Court observed.

The case stemmed from a parcel intercepted by authorities, which contained the banned substance ganja. While Bhatacharyya’s mobile number was found on the package, neither the parcel's address nor its name corresponded to him. Bhatacharyya was interrogated, during which he confessed to being involved in the alleged crime. However, the court found that his confession, made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, was inadmissible as evidence under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, which excludes confessions made to police officers.

In his defense, Bhatacharyya argued that there was no recovery of any contraband substance directly from him, and no material evidence, aside from his mobile number, linked him to the parcel. He contended that the confession obtained during interrogation could not be used against him, as voluntary statements made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are not considered valid evidence in court.

The prosecution admitted that apart from Bhatacharyya's confession, there was no corroborative evidence to substantiate the charges. The Court noted that the lack of material evidence beyond the confession rendered the case baseless.

Citing precedents set by the Supreme Court regarding the inadmissibility of confessions made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the Court ruled that there was no legal basis to continue the proceedings against Bhatacharyya.

The Court held that prosecuting Bhatacharyya without additional proof would amount to an abuse of the legal process and result in a miscarriage of justice. "Permitting further proceedings against the petitioner, who at any point in time was not alleged to be involved in any crime except in the aforesaid statement, would become an abuse of the process of law and result in patent injustice," the Court said.

Cause Title: Saikat Bhattacharya v. Union of India [Neutral Citation No. 2024:KHC:36218]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocates Shivaram Sharma Buddhiraju, Tahura Anzar

Respondent: Advocate H Mallan Goud (CGC)

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice M NagaprasannaKarnataka High CourtSection 67 NDPS Act

Sukriti Mishra