Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, J
Koneru Maruthi Prasad @ Maruthi Rao, S/O Venkataramaiah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/A-1 to A-33 U/s.482 of Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the charge sheet in NDPS S.C.No.11/2019 on the file of learned I Addl.District & Sessions Judge, at Chittoor.
02. Heard Sri P.Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/respondent.
03. The contention of the petitioners is that they were prosecuted for the offence under sections 120-B, 341, 307, 353 r/w.34 of Indian Penal Code , 1860 (for short, “I.P.C.”), sections 59, 63 and 31 (Z) (V) of Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 (for short, “the FSSA, 2006”) and U/s.20(b)(ii)(C) r/w.8(c) of NDPS Act, 1985.
04. The gravamen of the charge is that on 16.01.2018 at about 03.00 p.m. Inspector of Police, Puttur Rural Circle (L.W-16), SI of Police, Puttur and SI of Police, Narayanavanam have conducted raid on un-named factory situated near Weavers Colony, Kailasakona Village, Narayanavanam Mandal, and found A-3 to A-7 and A-9 to A-31 indulged in manufacturing the prohibited items like gutka and pan masala inside the factory; then the accused wro
The Food Safety and Standards Act does not apply to tobacco products, and violations of mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act invalidate the prosecution.
Prosecution under IPC and FSSA for tobacco products is unsustainable; mandatory provisions of NDPS Act must be followed to maintain charges.
Point of Law : Food Adulteration - Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life –Criminal Proceedings Quashed - Act done by petitioners i.e., transportation of khaini and che....
Compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act is essential for establishing the prosecution's case, particularly the requirement for drawing samples in the presence of a Magistrate, which was ....
Non-compliance with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act leads to vitiation of conviction, requiring strict adherence to evidence collection protocols.
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of trial.
Non-compliance with procedural requirements under the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A, can lead to the exclusion of seized contraband as valid evidence in trial.
The prosecution established the appellant's conscious possession of narcotics, validating the conviction despite procedural non-compliance, as substantial evidence supported the case.
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act, requiring samples to be drawn and certified by a Magistrate, vitiates the trial as it fails to produce primary evidence.
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
