Mere Silence Of Accused During Investigation Doesn't Amount To Non-Cooperation: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that an accused person's silence during the course of an investigation cannot be equated with non-cooperation as right against self-incrimination is constitutionally protected.The Court refused to reject anticipatory bail in NDPS Act case on the ground the accused failed to disclose certain facts during the investigation.Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "mere silence or failure to make self-incriminating disclosures cannot be equated with non-cooperation warranting custodial interrogation. The right against self-incrimination is a constitutionally protected facet of personal liberty, and any demand for custodial interrogation merely to compel such disclosures stands on precarious legal footing."The Court was hearing a pre-arrest bail in a case pertaining to Sections 21(c) and 29 of NDPS Act. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in compliance with the interim order, the petitioner duly joined the investigation and extended full cooperation to the Investigating Officer. It was, therefore, prayed that the interim order be made absolute.Opposing the plea, the State counsel submitted that the petitioner has not fully cooperated with the Investigating Agency in as much as he has failed to disclose the source from whom he was allegedly procuring the recovered contraband, cough syrup, as well as the identities of other individuals allegedly involved in the offence.After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that the sole basis on which the State is seeking custodial interrogation of the petitioner is the alleged non-disclosure by the petitioner of certain facts, which, as per the State counsel amounts to non-cooperation. Rejecting the above State's submission, the judge observed, "It is well settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the purpose of joining investigation is to make oneself available to the Investigating Agency and to respond to lawful queries, and not to compulsorily divulge self-incriminating information."Justice Kaul highlighted that the conduct of the petitioner in appearing before the Investigating Officer and responding to the investigation satisfies the legal standard of cooperation.Considering that the accused joined the investigation and he had no previous criminal antecedents, the Court allowed the plea and interim relief was made absolute.Mr. Sunil Panwar, Advocate, for the petitioner.Mr. Rajat Gautam, Addl. A.G., Haryana.Title: Makul @ Mohamad Makul v. State of HaryanaClick here to read/download the order

Mere Silence Of Accused During Investigation Doesn't Amount To Non-Cooperation: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags