RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, MADAN B.LOKUR
State of H. P. – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Madan B. Lokur, J.
1. The question before us is whether the accidental or chance recovery of narcotic drugs during a personal or body search would attract the provisions of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act). In our opinion, the issue is no longer res integra having been answered in the negative by the Constitution Bench in State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh (1999) 6 SCC 172.
The facts:
2. The Respondent Sunil Kumar was travelling in a bus on 9th December, 2000 away from Chamba in Himachal Pradesh. The bus was stopped at Dhundiara Bungalow at about 1.15 p.m. for a 'traffic check' by ASI Joga Singh (PW-13), in-charge of Police Post Banikhet, accompanied by Head Constable Pritam Singh (PW-3), Constable Mazid Mohammad (PW-2) and Constable Des Raj (PW-5) all of whom were acting under the supervision of Gulab Singh (PW-12) the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dalhousie. A 'traffic check', we were told, means a check for ticketless passengers etc. We were also told that narcotic substances are quite easily available in the Chamba area, but the bus was not stopped for checking the carriage or transportation of any narcotics.
3. Be t
State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh (1994) 3 SCC 299 : (1999) 6 SCC 172
Mohinder Kumar v. State, Panaji
Sorabkhan Gandhkhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat (2004) 13 SCC 608
Joti Parshad v. State of Haryana 1993 Supp (2) SCC 497
Sheo Nath Singh v. Appellate Assistant CIT (1972) 3 SCC 234
Bharatbhai Bhagwanjibhai v. State of Gujarat (2002) 8 SCC 327
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.