- (1.) DEV Kant Trivedi, J. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties on this application for bail moved on behalf of Mohd. Ahmad alias Bhonde in Criminal Case No. 303/97 under Section 8/21/23/29, N. D. P. S. Act, District Lucknow.
(2.) IN the present case, the prosecu tion based its case on the statement of some alleged smugglers who said that they purchased contraband articles from the accused- applicant. The prosecution also based on its case on a signed statement made by the accused applicant before D. P. Sriyastava, INspector, Central Narcotic Bureau, Lucknow wherein he recorded a confession that the accused applicant deals in the heroin and had made certain transaction with several persons including those in whose statements the accused ap plicant was named. It is urged on behalf of the accused applicant that it is mentioned in the state ment of the accused applicant that he is literate and he has read upto Class-5 but still the Investigating Officer did notthink it fit to get the confessional statement of the accused applicant recorded in his own hand writing. It is further urged on behalf of the accused applicant that the statements made by the alleged purchasers of the heroin, for the present are not worth being used against the accused applicant particularly when three out of four of them have already been granted bail.
(3.) NO doubt it was open to the In quiry Officer to record the statement him self but it raises suspicion, when the ac cused applicant claimed to be literate as to why the accused applicant was not re quired to write the statement himself. In the present case, no contraband article was recovered from the possession of the accused applicant. The statement was recorded by an Inspector who is inter ested in seeing his case to get through. No criminal antecedents of the accused ap plicant have been indicated. Co-accused on whose statement the involvement of applicant particularly when even recovery was made from them have been granted bail. Hence at present suffice it to say that it is a case in which there exist reasonable grounds of drawing the inference that the accused applicant is not guilty of the of fence of which he is accused and there seem no material to suspect that he will indulge in criminal activities.;