Rajasthan High Court Flags Mechanical NDPS Prosecution After Man Implicated Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Without Any Recovery

While granting bail to an accused under NDPS Act, Rajasthan High Court highlighted that the accused was implicated without any recovery from him, solely based on information received from the main accused from whom the narcotics were recovered. The bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Jain highlighted “failure in the advice mechanism of prosecution before recommending a charge sheet against any person”. The Court opined that there may be deficiency or insufficiency of evidence to forward any person for trial, and hence the trial court was required to look into all aspects while framing charges. It was held that in case of any deficiency, Section 273, BNSS, had to be invoked to award compensation to an innocent person for remaining in custody and also facing unnecessary prosecution. For context, the petitioner was accused in an NDPS Act, and had filed a bail application. It was contended that he was accused only based on submission by the main accused. The petitioner also submitted that the main accused along with other co-accused were already granted bail. After hearing the contentions, the Court highlighted that the petitioner was arraigned only based on information by the main accused, but no recovery was effected from the petitioner. The Court further considered that the accused was not required anymore in the investigation, and was in custody for some time. In this light, the Court granted bail to the accused. Before parting, the Court pointed out that, “…without any recovery, instant case has been registered against the petitioner that too only on the information of accused Jawan Singh as he claimed his distribution chain includes present petitioner as out of consignment, recovered from him, he is likely to deliver 1-2 gram of Smack to present petitioner, who indulged in sell of contraband/narcotics.”It was held that the police report submitted by the Public Prosecutor explicitly mentioned that to name any person for trial, no legal evidence was required, and it was not police's concern whether sufficient evidence was available or not. In this background, the Court highlighted failure in the advice mechanism of the Public Prosecutor before recommending the charge sheet against any person. It was held that the trial Court was required to look into all the aspects at the stage of framing charges and in case of any deficiency, compensation shall be awarded to an innocent person, under Section 273, BNSS. The Court directed the order to be sent to ACS Home and DGP Rajasthan for taking action so that innocent persons did not suffer because of “non-application of mind at grass-root level”. Title: Akshya v State of Rajasthan Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 175Click Here To Read/Download Order

Rajasthan High Court Flags Mechanical NDPS Prosecution After Man Implicated Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Without Any Recovery

Nupur Agrawal

Tags