Judgment :-

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This matter arises out of a search and seizure which took place on 3rd September, 1987. This appeal was also adjourned time and again since the year 1997 to await the decision of the Constitution Bench. This decision has come and is reported as Karnail Singh V. State of Haryana (2009) 8 see 539. The question posed was as to the effect of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 42 and in particular 42(2) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. This matter was referred to the Constitution Bench owing to an apparent conflict between two judgments of this Court, Abdul Rashid Ibrahim Mansuri v. State of Guiarat (2000) 2 SCC 513 wherein it was held by a three Judge Bench that compliance with Section 42(2) Act was mandatory and failure of the police officer to of the take down the information receive~ by him in writing and to forthwith send a report to his immediate official superior would cause prejudice to the accused whereas in Sajan Abrabam v. State of Kerala (2001) 6 SCC 692 which had also been decided by a three Judge Bench it had been held that substantial compliance with the provisions of S