Back
1998(7) Supreme 233
Supreme Court of India
(From Rajasthan High Court)
G.T. Nanavati & S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.
Sayar Puri -Appellant
versus
State of Rajasthan -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1997
Decided on 2-9-1998
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : P.S. Jha, Advocate.
For the Respondent : K.S. Bhati, Advocate.
(ii) NDPS, Act-Sections 8 r/w 18-Conviction under-Challenged on ground of search procedure u/s. 50-No breach of any particular condition of Section 50 pointed out-Search made after P.W. 1 had informed appellant about his rights and appellant stated he had no objection if he was searched by him-Whether there is any violation of Section 50? (No) - Appeal dismissed. (Paras 2 & 3)
Judgment
Nanavati, J.-The appellant has been convicted under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the NDPS Act as he was found in possession of opium. He is challenging his conviction in this appeal.
2. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that no site plan was prepared by the police to prove that the place where the appellant was found sitting was a part of the public road. In our opinion this contention is misconceived. The police officers who were examined in this case and also the panch witnesses have stated that the accused was found sitting on a bench on the Mandia Road. Thus the accused was found sitting on a public road and, therefore, neither the procedure under Section 42(2) of the Act was required to be followed nor the site plan was required to be prepared. Another contention raised by the appellant is that the requirements of Section 50 of the Act have not been strictly complied with. We find no substance in this contention. Section 50 prescribes the manner in which the search of the person shall be conducted. No breach of any particular condition has been pointed out. Moreover, we find that P.W. 1 has stated in his evidence that he had complied with those conditions. P.W. 1 had informed the appellant about his rights. He has further stated that the appellant had told him that he had no objection if he was searched by him.
3. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
(N.K.R.) Appeal dismissed.
***********
00023
SupremeToday
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
