TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 613
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... By this common order, we propose to dispose of two Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal filed against the common judgment and order dated 15th July, 2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Madras. SLP(Crl) No. 5703/2021 has been filed by Bharat Chaudhary Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 5703 OF 2021 [A-4] who is aggrieved by the reversal of the bail order dated 02nd November, 2020 granted in his favour by the learned Special Judge, EC & NDPS Cases, Chennai whereas Raja Chandrasekharan [A-1] has challenged the dismissal of the bail application filed by him under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 2. The case set up by the prosecution is that on specific information received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Chennai Zonal Unit For short 'the DRI', Officers of DRI had seized about 1,37,665 tablets of different types collectively weighing 90Kgs. (approx.) described as psychotropic substances from the following four locations, all situated in Chennai: (i) Office of M/s. Aviation Star Express, Ekkattuthangal, a Franchisee of M/s DHL Express India Private Limited; (ii) 2 Destination, a Franchisee of M/s S.T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....October, 2019, officers of the DRI had gone to Jaipur to arrest A-4 after five months, solely on the basis of the statement made by A-1 under Section 67 of the NDPS Act; (iv) there was no live link established against A-4, a resident of Jaipur of having connived with the other accused, A-1 to A-3 who were all residing in Chennai and arrested from there. (v) the test reports in respect of the seized material were awaited and it was not established whether the tablets which, as per the accused were sexual enhancement tablets, would qualify either as a narcotic or psychotrophic substance so as to fall within the ambit of the NDPS Act; (vi) The first test report received by the DRI on 21st November, 2019, revealed that the tablets were actually sexual enhancement drugs and not covered under the NDPS Act and the test report in respect of 26 tablets sent to CFSL, Hyderabad, was still awaited. 5. Being mindful of the recent verdict of a Three Judge Bench of this Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Madras [2021] 4 SCC 1 wherein as per the majority decision, a confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act has been held to be inadmissible in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the High Court to have cancelled the bail granted to A-4 by the learned Special Judge, EC & NDPS cases. He submitted that a grave error has been committed by the High Court by completely overlooking the fact that not a single tablet was recovered from the possession of A-4; that the tablets were seized from the premises of A-1 to A-3 and some of the extracted samples sent for testing showed that a large number of the seized pills were sex enhancement drugs and not contraband; that the seized contraband had not been produced or sampled before the Magistrate and that A4 has been dragged into the matter solely on the basis of the confession/statements made by Raja Chandrasekaran [A-1] under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, despite the fact that in a recent judgment of this Court in Tofan Singh (supra), the majority view is that a confessional statement is not admissible in evidence which view has been followed in Criminal Appeal No. 1273 of 2021 titled "Sanjeev Chandra Agarwal vs. Union of India", decided on 25th October, 2021. 8. Mr. Anand Grover, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of Raja Chandrasekharan [A-1] has argued that the High Court has fallen into an error by rejecti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and having cursorily glanced at the records, we are of the opinion that the impugned order cancelling the bail granted in favour of Bharat Chaudhary [A-4], is not sustanabile in view of the fact that the records sought to be relied upon by the prosecution show that one test report dated 6th December, 2019, two test reports dated 17th December, 2019 and one test report dated 21st December, 2019 in respect of the sample pills/tablets drawn and sent for testing by the prosecuting agency conclude with a note appended by the Assistant Commercial Examiner at the foot of the reports stating that "quantitative analysis of the samples could not be carried out for want of facilities". In the absence of any clarity so far on the quantitative analysis of the samples, the prosecution cannot be heard to state at this preliminary stage that the petitioners have been found to be in possession of commercial quantity of psychotropic subtances as contemplated under the NDPS Act. Further, a large number of the tablets that have been seized by the DRI admittedly contain herbs/medicines meant to enhance male potency and they do not attract the provis....