Back
V SRINIVAS
Shah Jaswathraj, Anantapur – Appellant
Versus
State Of A P Rep By Public Prosecutor High Court Hyd – Respondent
ORDER :
V Srinivas, J.
Assailing the common judgment dated 26.05.2011 in Crl.A.No.137 of 2010 on the file of the Court of learned Sessions Judge at Anantapur, confirming the conviction and sentence passed against the accused by the judgment dated 13.09.2010 in C.C.No.495 of 2007 on the file of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile Magistrate) at Anantapur, for the offences under section 18(c) of Drugs Act 1940 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) punishable under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Act, Section 18(a), punishable under Section 28 of the Act and Section 22(1)(cca), punishable under Section 22(3) of the Act, the petitioner/accused filed the present criminal revision case under Section 397 r/w.401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
2. The revision case was admitted on 31.05.2011 and the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner/accused was suspended, vide orders in Crl.R.C.M.P.No.1667 of 2011.
3. The shorn of necessary facts are that:
The court can invoke the Probation of Offenders Act to release an offender on probation considering their age, health, and lack of prior criminal history.
The conviction under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires proof of sale or stocking of drugs without a valid license, and procedural compliance in investigations is crucial for upholding such convict....
Compliance with statutory provisions is essential for the validity of prosecution actions; failure to adhere to such requirements can lead to acquittal.
Statements made to Drug Inspectors are admissible in evidence, and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was established in this case.
Statements made to Drug Inspectors are admissible in evidence, and concurrent findings of fact by lower courts are upheld unless proven erroneous.
The testimony of official witnesses can be the sole basis for conviction if it is reliable and consistent, even in the absence of independent witnesses.
The court established that rehabilitation through probation can be appropriate even after conviction, considering the offender's character and circumstances.
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
