Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH
S.RACHAIAH
Laxman, S/o Balu Rathod – Appellant
Versus
State Through Excise Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the conviction under ndps act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding inconsistencies in evidence. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. analysis of witness testimonies reveals contradictions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. conclusion: acquittal based on inconsistent evidence. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
S. RACHAIAH, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 30.06.2021 and order on sentence dated 01.07.2021 in Spl. C (NDPS) No.13/2016 on the file of the Special Judge and Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bidar, wherein the accused has been found guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).
Factual matrix of the case are as under:
2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 24.02.2013, when C.W.3 – Hanmanth V. Guttedar, Excise Inspector, Raichur, C.W.4 – Sham Savalgi, Excise Deputy Commissioner, Bidar, C.W.7 – Adhinath, Excise Sub- Inspector, C.W.6 – Sanjaykumar Gladson, Excise Police and other staff were on duty on account of the fact that there was local body election and th
Conviction under drug statutes requires consistent evidence; discrepancies in witness testimonies can invalidate the prosecution's case.
Narcotics, Intoxicate and Liquor - Search and seizure – Investigation by Police officer - There is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials unless supported by independent evidence is u....
The prosecution must prove possession of contraband beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of essential witnesses and physical evidence compromises the conviction.
Benefit of the doubt extended to the appellant due to errors and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of complying with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly in relation to search, seizure, and sampling procedure....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; any reasonable doubt benefits the accused, leading to acquittal.
Mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act must be complied with for valid conviction.
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
Strict adherence to search and seizure procedures under the NDPS Act is essential; failure to follow mandated protocols invalidates convictions.
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
