SK Law House Legal Articles

When police seize a commercial quantity of contraband—such as 117.850 kilograms of ganja—from the principal accused and record a confession statement alleging that the contraband was purchased from a supplier in another State, can the investigating agency array that alleged supplier as a co-accused, keep him incarcerated in prison, and put him on trial without producing a single bank statement, call record, or independent corroborative document? In an authoritative ruling enforcing fundamental evidentiary safeguards under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), the High Court of Judicature at Madras quashed the Special Court proceedings against Accused No. 5 and directed his immediate release from Central Prison, Puzhal.

Case Details at a Glance

• Case Title: Shek Naseer Useen @ Shaik Nazeer Hussian vs. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, M-2 MM Colony Police Station, Chennai
• Court Name: High Court of Judicature at Madras (Principal Seat)
• Coram / Judge Name: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan
• Case Number: Crl.O.P. No. 31964 of 2026 (CNR: HCMA012583282026)
• Trial Court Proceeding Quashed: C.C. No. 531 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai (Crime No. 442 of 2023)
• Order Pronounced Date: 03-11-2026 (Uploaded on: 04-11-2026)

1. Factual Matrix: Seizure of 117.850 Kgs of Ganja and Implication of A5

The prosecution registered Crime No. 442 of 2023 on the file of the Inspector of Police, M-2 MM Colony Police Station, Chennai, for alleged offences under Section 8(c) read with Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). According to the prosecution, Accused No. 1 (A1) and Accused No. 2 (A2) were found in physical possession of a commercial quantity of 117.850 kilograms of ganja.

During investigation, solely on the basis of the confession statement recorded from A1, other accused persons were implicated in the crime, and the petitioner—a resident of Narsippatinam Town, Anakapalli District, Andhra Pradesh—was arrayed as Accused No. 5 (A5). The petitioner was arrested, remanded to judicial custody, and remained confined in Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, while the final report was taken on file as C.C. No. 531 of 2024 before the learned Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai. Invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the Madras High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the petitioner sought to quash the charge sheet in C.C. No. 531 of 2024 insofar as he was concerned.

2. Total Absence of Bank Statements or Corroborative Evidence

Examining the prosecution case against A5, Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan noted that the specific allegation derived from the confession of A1 was that A1 and A2 used to purchase contraband from A5 in Andhra Pradesh, and that at the instance of A5, A1 and A2 had deposited money into a bank account.

However, upon scrutinizing the entire final report and accompanying documents in C.C. No. 531 of 2024, the High Court found a fatal evidentiary vacuum:

• No Bank Account Records Produced: Despite alleging that money for purchasing ganja was deposited into a bank account at the instance of A5, the investigating agency failed to produce a single bank statement or financial document to establish the alleged transactions.
• No Material Under Section 8(c) NDPS Act: Section 8(c) of the NDPS Act prohibits the production, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase, transportation, warehousing, use, consumption, import inter-State, export inter-State, or transhipment of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance. No material whatsoever was placed on record to show that the petitioner had indulged in any of the prohibited activities.
• Zero Independent Corroboration: Apart from the bare confession statement of co-accused A1 recorded while in police custody, no other independent incriminating material existed to connect the petitioner with the crime.

3. Inadmissibility Under Section 23 BSA (Section 25 Evidence Act) & Tofan Singh Ratio

Evaluating whether a criminal trial can be sustained solely on a co-accused's statement to the police, the Madras High Court applied settled constitutional and statutory evidence principles:

"9. Furthermore, the confession statement of a co-accused cannot form the basis of the prosecution in the absence of any legally admissible material. The alleged confession statement of the co-accused recorded by the police is hit by Section 23 of the BSA, corresponding to Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and is inadmissible in view of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, wherein it was held that the officers invested with powers under Section 53 of the NDPS Act are 'police officers' within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act and that a confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be used as a confessional statement against an accused in the trial of an offence under the NDPS Act."

Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan emphasized that a confession statement of a co-accused is not substantive evidence. Because it is hit by Section 23 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (corresponding to Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872), it cannot be translated into legally admissible evidence at the stage of trial. In the absence of independent material capable of being converted into admissible evidence, compelling the petitioner to undergo the ordeal of a full criminal trial would amount to a grave miscarriage of justice.

4. Operative Order: Proceedings Quashed and Immediate Release Directed

Allowing Crl.O.P. No. 31964 of 2026 by order dated 03.11.2026, the Madras High Court issued two decisive directions:

1. Charge Sheet Quashed Against A5: The criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 531 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai, arising out of Crime No. 442 of 2023, were quashed insofar as the petitioner (A5) alone is concerned.
2. Direction to Superintendent of Prison, Puzhal: Since the petitioner was languishing in judicial custody, the High Court directed the Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai, to release the petitioner forthwith, if his detention is not required in connection with any other case.

5. Practical Defense Takeaways for NDPS Conspiracy & Abetment Charges

This ruling is a critical precedent for criminal defense practitioners handling NDPS prosecutions under Section 29(1) (criminal conspiracy and abetment) where an individual is roped in without physical recovery:

• Commercial Quantity Bar Does Not Validate Zero-Evidence Charge Sheets: Even where the primary seizure involves a massive commercial quantity (117.850 Kgs of ganja) attracting Section 20(b)(ii)(C) and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the High Court under Section 528 BNSS will quash the prosecution at the threshold if the final report lacks legally admissible material linking the secondary accused to the contraband.
• Scrutinize Financial and Telephonic Links in the Final Report: When police allege that money was transferred to a supplier's bank account, failure to annex certified bank statements under the Bankers' Books Evidence Act / BSA destroys the prosecution's conspiracy link.
• Direct Remedy for Undertrial Prisoners: Where an accused is confined in prison solely on a co-accused's confession after the filing of the charge sheet, filing a quash petition under Section 528 BNSS secures not only termination of the trial but an immediate release order addressed directly to the Prison Superintendent.

For dedicated legal representation in NDPS Special Court trials, quashing of charge sheets under Section 528 BNSS, bail applications, and criminal appellate litigation across Tamil Nadu, explore our defense practice at SK Law House Criminal Defense Practice, review our full range of legal services at SK Law House Practice Areas, or contact our office via the SK Law House Contact Page.