Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Greeshmal G. S/o Shri Gireesh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Represented by S.P.P. High Court of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court assesses the legitimacy of evidence concerning narcotics. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. the parties present arguments regarding the legality and necessity of the bail. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. the court notes procedural failures in sampling methods for narcotics. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. the court emphasizes the fundamental right to a speedy trial. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
1. Accused in Spl.C.C.No.2291/2023 pending before the Court of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No. NCB F.NO.48/1/18/2023/BZU registered by Narcotics Control Bureau, Bengaluru Zonal Unit, for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with Sections 20 (b) (ii) (C), 27 and 28 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 ("NDPS Act" for short), is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. It is the case of prosecution that based on the credible information received on 26.04.2023, the team of officers of NCB had intercepted the Petitioner at about 12.15 hours when he arrived at Bengaluru in Prashanti Express Train from Bhubaneshawar, Odisha. Upon enquiry, the suspect revealed
Improper adherence to sampling procedures under the NDPS Act can vitiate the seizure, violating an accused's right to a speedy trial.
The court emphasized that samples of contraband must be drawn in the presence of a Magistrate, as required by law, to ensure the integrity of evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of substantial compliance with guidelines and the consequences of non-compliance on the prosecution's case under the NDPS Act.
Bail under the NDPS Act requires the accused to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing they are not guilty, especially when substantial commercial quantities of contraband are involved.
Improper sample collection in drug cases violates mandatory guidelines, impacting the prosecution's case and justifying bail despite Section 37 restrictions.
Procedural non-compliance in evidence collection under the N.D.P.S. Act can vitiate the prosecution's case, warranting bail for the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the defective sampling procedure at the time of recovery and seizure of contraband can be challenged during the trial before the Special Judge....
Non-compliance with mandatory sampling procedures, as prescribed in the Standing Order, may invoke reasonable doubt and prejudice the accused, influencing the grant of bail.
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
