Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.T. NANAVATI AND SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, JJ.
Birakishore Kar, Appellant
VERSUS
State of Orissa, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 69 of 1997, D/- 12-8-1999.
Section 50 - NDPS Act 1985 - The appellant's conviction under Section 50 of the NDPS Act 1985 for possessing and transporting poppy straw without a license was confirmed by the High Court. The appellant was found lying on a plastic bag containing poppy straw in a train compartment. The appellant's defense that the bag was not found in his possession was rejected by the trial Court and the High Court. The appellant's contention regarding the mandatory requirement of Section 50 was dismissed by the Supreme Court, emphasizing that Section 50 applies only to the search of a person, not a premise.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for possessing and transporting poppy straw without a license after being found lying on a plastic bag containing poppy straw in a train compartment.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court confirmed the appellant's conviction after reappreciating the evidence, and the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the mandatory requirement of Section 50 does not apply to the search of a premise.
Issues: Conviction under Section 50 of the NDPS Act 1985, compliance with the mandatory requirement of Section 50
Ratio Decidendi: Section 50 of the NDPS Act 1985 applies only to the search of a person, not a premise.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
Judgement
JUDGMENT :- The appellant is questioning in this appeal his conviction by the trial Court under Section 50 of the NDPS Act 1985 based upon the finding that he did possess and transport poppy straw without a licence. The High Court has confirmed his conviction after reappreciating the evidence.
2. It was not in dispute that the appellant was travelling by Howrah-Puri Sri Jaganath Express on the night between 18-9-1991 and 19-9-1991 and that when the train had arrived at platform No. 1 of the Balasore Railway Station and it was searched by PW-1 and the Officers accompaning him. The appellant was found lying on a plastic bag in one of the compartments of that train. The said plastic bag was then seized and on verification, it was found containing 10 Kgs. of poppy straw. The only defence raised by the appellant was that the said plastic bag was not found from his possession. The trial Court and the High Court after appreciating the evidence of PW-1 and PW-4 has held that the appellant was in possession of that plastic bag. Some other points were also raised before the High Court but the High Court did not find any substance therein.
3. What is now contended by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the mandatory requirement of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 viz. that the person to be searched should be told about his right to be examined in presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer was not complied with in this case. This contention is really misconcieved. In this case it was not the person of the appellant which was searched. He was found sitting on a plastic bag which belonged to him and which contained poppy straw. As pointed out by this Court in State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, (1999) 4 JT (SC) 595 : (1999 AIR SCW 2494 : AIR 1999 SC 2378 : 1999 Cri LJ 3672) Section 50 would come into play only in the case of search of a person as distinguished from search of any premise etc. As we do not find any substance in this appeal, it is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
FOR CITATION : AIR 2000 SC 3626(1)
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
