- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11125 CRL.P No. 3204 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3204 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MADHAVAN RAJ, S/O RAMESH RAJ, AGED 22 YEARS, R/AT NO. 720, 2ND B CROSS, 8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 030. 2. TARUN REDDY, S/O. KRISHNA REDDY, AGED 23 YEARS, R/AT NO. 71, 3RD MAIN ROAD, DIAMOND AJANTA HOUSE, MARATAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 030. …PETITIONERS (BY MR. K.S. VISHWANATHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, J. C. NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE - 560046. REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, SANJAY NAGAR POLICE STATION BANGALORE - 560 056. REPRESENTED BY SPP, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11125 CRL.P No. 3204 of 2025 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY MR. RAHUL RAI, HCGP) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.CC.NO.463/2023 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.93/2021 OF J.C.NAGAR P.S., BANGALORE, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 20(B),22(c) OF NDPS ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE XXXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR NDPS, BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The learned HCGP accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. The petitioners in these petitions, accused Nos. 5, 6, and 10, who are facing trial for offences punishable under Sections 20(b) and 20(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the “NDPS Act”), are before this Court seeking relief. 3. According to the prosecution’s case, on 20.06.2021, credible information prompted a raid during which three individuals, accused Nos. 1 to 3, were caught with 950 grams of ganja. They allegedly confessed to procuring the substance from accused Nos. 4 to 6, who purportedly purchased it from a dark website. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11125 CRL.P No. 3204 of 2025 Subsequently, accused Nos. 4 to 6, including the petitioner, were apprehended, and their mobile phones, laptops, and vehicle were seized. Data retrieved from the petitioner’s phone allegedly indicated his involvement in purchasing ganja from the dark website. 4. Accused No. 4 had approached this Court in W.P. No. 11823/2023, challenging the very impugned proceedings. This Court, vide its order dated 06.03.2024, quashed the proceedings insofar as they related to accused No. 4, by observing as follows: "5. Initially, accused Nos.1 to 3 were apprehended based on the information received. Their confession implicated accused Nos.4 to 6 in procuring ganja from the Dark website. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested, and his electronic devices were seized for forensic examination. 6. The forensic report, part of the charge sheet, revealed no incriminating data in the cloud or any associated social media accounts on the petitioner's phone. It indicated visits to the Dark website but did not conclusively prove ganja procurement. Lack of corroborating evidence renders reliance on co-accused confessions, inadmissible under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, insufficient for prosecution. 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh - vs- State of Tamil Nadu - (2021) 4 SCC 1 at para-158.1 has held as follows: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11125 CRL.P No. 3204 of 2025 "158.1. That the officers who are vested with powers under Section 53 of the NDPS Act are "police officers" within the meaning of Section 25 of the Evidence Act, as a result of which any confessional statement made to them would be barred under the provisions of Section 25 of the Evidence Act, and cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused under the NDPS Act." 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh -vs- State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2013) 16 SCC 31, has held that, any confessional statement made to officers empowered under Section 53 cannot be taken into account in order to convict an accused, except to the extent found "relevant" under Section 53A, and when corroborated in accordance with law." 5. Therefore, in the absence of any corroborative material to substantiate the allegations against the petitioners, the continuation of criminal proceedings solely on the basis of the accused’s confession would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 6. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The petitions are allowed. (ii) The impugned proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.463/2023 on the file of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11125 CRL.P No. 3204 of 2025 Bengaluru insofar as it relates to petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 10 is hereby quashed. In view of disposal of the main petition, all pending IA's does not survive for consideration. NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53 Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE