#confessional statements

Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be relied upon to deny bail, and financial transactions without evidence of conscious possession are insufficient to establish complicity. The judgment reinforces the presumption of innocence and strict evidentiary standards in NDPS cases.

Allahabad High Court reinforces that a co-accused's confessional statement under Section 29 of the NDPS Act cannot be used to deny bail to another accused, absent independent evidence linking them to the recovery. The ruling aligns with the Supreme Court's precedent in Toofan Singh, ensuring bail is not denied solely on the basis of a co-accused's confession.

Jharkhand High Court grants bail under the UAPA, ruling that prolonged detention based solely on uncorroborated confessions violates Article 21. The court held mere association with a gang does not prove participation in the offence, setting a precedent for bail jurisprudence under anti-terror laws.