#telephonic evidence

The Delhi HC held that anticipatory bail cannot be denied solely on unverified telephonic calls without interception, stressing that liberty under Section 438 CrPC needs substantive evidence. It shields NDPS accused whose case relies only on call logs lacking corroboration.

The Delhi High Court ruled that co-accused statements, call-detail records and modest money transactions do not constitute substantive proof of a drug-kingpin, granting regular bail where no narcotics were seized and the charge sheet is unfiled. This narrows the evidentiary bar for bail in NDPS prosecutions.