12 Kolkata: Confessions made during police interrogations in drugs bust cases under NDPS Act were maintainable in court, the Calcutta High Court's Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench held on Friday, refusing to quash criminal proceedings against a man, implicated based on the confession made by a co-accused, now deceased, to police.
Not only did the deceased accused, while in police custody, mention the person's name but he also made a confessional, self-implicating statement. Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee on Monday held: "A confession, if it is voluntary, truthful, reliable and beyond reproach, is an efficacious piece of evidence to establish the guilt of an accused. It is no doubt true that before solely acting on a confession, the court requires some corroboration to award conviction, but it cannot be said a conviction cannot be maintained at all on the basis of the confession made during investigation in a proceeding under the NDPS Act."
Naresh Mahato approached the HC, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against him. On Jan 11, 2024, Bhakti Nagar police station SI, along with officers, seized a large quantity of narcotic substances, including cough syrup, capsules and tablets, from a man, Santanu Mazumdar, who later died. During interrogation, Mazumdar had said Mahato and he were involved in "procuring and selling narcotic substances illegally... for illegal gains." This was mentioned in the charge sheet.
Based on Mazumdar's statement, Mahato was arrested on Oct 24, 2024. He was released on bail. His counsel argued that, first, his name transpired in a custodial interrogation, and secondly, Mazumdar's confessional statement could not be used against him. The third argument was that even if Evidence Act allowed the confession to be used... it could not be done here as nothing was found. It was also claimed the accused was coerced into making the statement.
The state's counsel submitted the NDPS Act was a special statute, enacted to curb drug trafficking. He argued if the quashing plea of the accused was accepted, it would set a dangerous precedent with all accused, implicated on the basis of a co-accused's statement in narcotics cases, would go to court, calling it inadmissible. "In many cases, it is only the co-accused statement, on the basis of which real people involved in the offence are apprehended," he said.
The judge noted the materials relied upon by the accused did not prove the confession was not voluntary, and he refused to quash the proceedings. The accused was asked to state his grievances.