Patna High Court
Lal Babu Yadav @ Babu Lal Yadav @ Lal YadavversusThe Union of India through D.R.I
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSUL
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the statement under Section 67 is not admissible as confessional evidence and no independent recovery links him to the contraband.
Summary
Lal Babu Yadav was arrested in connection with a large seizure of 119.560 kg of ganja, the vehicle being registered in his name. The only link to him was a confessional statement recorded from the driver under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, with no independent recovery from the petitioner. He had been in custody for about eleven months when he applied for bail. The Union of India opposed bail, but the court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, which held that a statement under Section 67 is not admissible as confessional evidence. Consequently, the court granted bail on the condition of a cash bond and sureties, emphasizing that the observation was limited to the bail application and not the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether a statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act can be the sole basis for continued detention of the accused.
- Whether bail should be granted given the petitioner’s prolonged custody and lack of independent evidence linking him to the seized narcotics.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(b)(c), 25, 29, 67, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 67
- confessional statement
- drug trafficking
- custody
- evidentiary admissibility
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18015 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2025 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna
======================================================
Lal Babu Yadav @ Babu Lal Yadav @ Lal Yadav S/O Shankar yadav
Resident of Village- Ward No.- 11, Chhavani Mor, Behind Baba Petrol Pump,
P.S- Kochas, Distt.- Rohtas, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through D.R.I Delhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh,Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (A.S.G.)
Mr. Ankit Kumar Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL ORDER
4 27-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in DRI Patna Unit Case
No. 27 of 2024-25 (Spl. NDPS Case No. 147 of 2025) registered
under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(b)(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. 119.560 kgs of Ganja were seized from the vehicle.
The driver of the vehicle disclosed the name of the petitioner as
the consignor and owner of the said contraband. The vehicle
was registered in the name of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
name of the petitioner has transpired in the course of a
confessional statement of the driver of the vehicle, recorded
under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, and the petitioner is in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18015 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
2/3
custody since 21.06.2025. He further submits that out of six
witnesses, only one has been examined. The record would show
that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner, and his
name has transpired only on the basis of a confessional
statement.
5. Learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union
of India has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
6. No independent recovery has been effected from the
petitioner, and his implication rests solely upon a statement of
the driver recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. The
petitioner has been in custody since 21.06.2025, a period of
approximately eleven months. In view of the law authoritatively
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v.
State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, wherein it has
been held that a statement recorded under Section 67 of the
NDPS Act is not admissible as a confessional statement and
cannot form the basis of conviction, this Court is inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the
like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18015 of 2026(4) dt.27-05-2026
3/3
Exclusive Special NDPS Court No. 1 in connection
with DRI Patna Unit Case No. 27 of 2024-25 (Spl.
NDPS Case No. 147 of 2025).
8. It is made clear that any observation made
herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for
the purpose of adjudication of the present bail
application. Such observations shall not be construed
as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not
influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Ansul, J)
Vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.