SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 391

RANJAN GOGOI, R.BANUMATHI
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Pardeep Kumar Etc. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Varinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Rabin Majumder, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

RANJAN GOGOI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals are by the State of Himachal Pradesh challenging the judgment of the High Court acquitting the accused-respondent Nos.1 and 2 of the charge of commission of offences under Section 20 read with Section 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act"). The Judgment of acquittal by the High Court is in reversal of the conviction recorded by learned trial court which had imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and fine of Rs.1,50,000/- on each of the accused. On default of payment of the fine amount, it was ordered by the learned trial Court that the accused-respondents will suffer imprisonment for a further period of one year.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that on 27-1-2009 at about 6.30 p.m. while a police party was on patrolling duty on National Highway 21 on the Manali- Kullu road, a white colour Indica car was signaled to stop. According to the prosecution, the vehicle stopped at a distance of about 25 feet away from the police party. One person is alleged to fled away from the car and the accused No.1 was found sitting in the rear seat of the v





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top