TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether regular bail should be granted where the petitioner was not apprehended with the contraband, the case rested substantially on a co-accused's disclosure and the petitioner's statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, and the electronic material was unsupported by a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Analysis: The recovery was not made from the petitioner and the petitioner was implicated primarily on the disclosure statement of a co-accused and on his own statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The confessional value of a statement under Section 67 was treated as unavailable for use as substantive evidence in view of the authoritative ruling relied upon. The Whatsapp material also did not presently carry evidentiary worth because the required certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was not available. As the investigation was complete and the challan had been filed, continued custody was found unnecessary for the purposes of the bail inquiry.
Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: A statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be used as confessional substantive evidence, and electronic communications require compliance with Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 before they can be relied upon.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
