By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
ApniLawApniLawApniLaw
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Reading: Confession of Co-Accused Alone Can’t Justify Charges Under NDPS Act: Madras HC
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
ApniLawApniLaw
Font ResizerAa
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court
  • Acts
  • Documentation
  • BNSS
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Advertise
© 2022 Foxiz News Network. Ruby Design Company. All Rights Reserved.
ApniLaw > Blog > High Court > Madras High Court > Confession of Co-Accused Alone Can’t Justify Charges Under NDPS Act: Madras HC
CriminalMadras High CourtNews

Confession of Co-Accused Alone Can’t Justify Charges Under NDPS Act: Madras HC

Amna Kabeer
Last updated: April 27, 2025 8:36 am
Amna Kabeer
4 months ago
Share
All About The NDPS Act
All About The NDPS Act
SHARE

Introduction: Charges Under NDPS Act

The Madras High Court has quashed a criminal case against a man accused of harbouring an offender on charges under NDPS Act. The court held that a confession by a co-accused, without supporting evidence, is insufficient to prosecute someone.

Contents
Introduction: Charges Under NDPS ActCase BackgroundPetitioner’s StanceCourt’s RulingFinal Verdict


Case Background

Karthick was charged under multiple sections of the NDPS Act and Section 120B of the IPC. The prosecution claimed he helped an accused person secure a job after the latter was involved in transporting 105 kg of ganja. Authorities had seized a vehicle linked to the accused, who allegedly attempted to smuggle the drugs to Sri Lanka.
Three accused fled the scene, and another picked them up in a car. Based on a confession from one of the arrested accused (A3), the police added Karthick to the list of accused. They claimed his act of helping A3 get a job amounted to harbouring.


Petitioner’s Stance

Karthick denied all involvement. He argued that he was unaware of the crime and had only helped his brother-in-law (A3) find employment in Tirupur. He claimed the police had no evidence except for A3’s confession, which is inadmissible in court.


Court’s Ruling

Justice P. Dhanabal emphasized that a co-accused’s confession to the police holds no evidentiary value unless supported by other material. In Karthick’s case, there were no witnesses, documents, or independent statements to link him to the alleged crime.
The court pointed out that arranging a job for someone does not equate to harbouring, especially when there’s no proof of criminal intent or awareness. The investigation officer also failed to examine any employer or colleague who worked with A3 in Tirupur.


Final Verdict

The court concluded that mere association or help, without knowledge of criminal activity, could not justify prosecution. Since no corroborative evidence existed, the court quashed the charges against Karthick. The judgment reinforces that implicating someone under the NDPS Act requires concrete proof, not just a co-accused’s statement.

You Might Also Like

Supreme Court Criticises Railways for Appointing Employees Based On Forged Documents

Accused Must Have Lived in Shared Household for Domestic Violence Case:Allahabad High Court

Right To Speedy Trial Not Automatic For Bail: Delhi High Court Denies Relief To Gangster Neeraj Bawaniya

Section 363 CrPC: Copy of Judgment to Accused and Others – Indian Criminal Procedure Code

Cash In Bank Account Is ‘Property’ Liable For Attachment: Kerala High Court

TAGGED:AccusedDefence EvidenceMadras high courtNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic SubstancesNDPS Act
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Previous Article Grounds For Divorce Divorce Petition Within One Year Requires Separate Application Under Hindu Marriage Act: Orissa HC
Next Article Section 1 - The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act - Short Title And Extent Section 1 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Short Title And Extent.
1 Comment
  • Pingback: Two Consenting Adults Free to Live Together Without Marriage Despite Of Religious Differences: Allahabad HC - ApniLaw

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
InstagramFollow
YoutubeSubscribe

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Popular News
Supreme Court of India
NewsSupreme Court

Should Convicted Politicians Be Allowed to Make Laws? : SC Questions

Apni Law
By Apni Law
6 months ago
Supreme Court Seeks Committee To Negotiate With Protesting Farmers At Punjab-Haryana Border
Supreme Court Upholds Regularisation Of Daily Wage Worker By MP High Court
Suicide Threats by Spouse Amount to Cruelty for Divorce: Bombay HC
No Income Certificate Needed on Pension for Mentally Disabled: Madras HC
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
Ad imageAd image

Your one-stop destination for legal news, articles, queries, and a directory of lawyers in India – all under one roof at ApniLaw.

Stay Updated

  • BNSS
  • News
  • Documentation
  • Acts
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court

Information

  • ApniLaw Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service

Advertise

  • Advertise with us
  • Newsletters
  • Deal

Find Us on Socials

ApniLawApniLaw
Follow US
© ApniLaw 2025. All Rights Reserved.
bg-n
Join Us!
Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss our latest news, podcasts etc..
Zero spam, Unsubscribe at any time.

More Interesting News

Cheque Bounce - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881

Compounding Of Cheque Bounce Offence: Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act

Allahabad High Court

Neglect Or Abandonment Of Elderly Parents Violate Right To Dignity Under Article 21: Allahabad HC

login
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?