In September, when the controversy about the death of Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput dominated prime time on many news channels, his ...
In September, when the controversy about the death of Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput dominated prime time on many news channels, his girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau.
Officials alleged that Chakraborty had supplied drugs to Singh. It was speculated that Rajput’s death may have been consequence of drug use. In late August, the investigation agencies leaked information to the media that Chakraborty had confessed to procuring drugs for Singh. But in September, when she applied for bail, she categorically told the special court that she had been coerced into making self-incriminatory statements and was withdrawing them.
Many people unfamiliar with the intricacies wondered why she needed to expressly withdraw her statement. After all, the Code of Criminal Procedure makes it clear that only statements made before a magistrative are admissable as evidence. Statements to the police are not, except for those parts of the statements that lead to the discovery of new facts.
Chakraborty’s move was necessary because of the nature of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, under which she had been arrested.
Under this special law to deal with the India’s drug problem, a confession made to an officer designated under the Act was deemed admissible in court.
This question...
