JUDGMENT - M.B. SHAH, C.J. :---The Division Bench consisting of G.R. Majithia and Vishnu Sahai, JJ., by order dated June 16, 1995 differed with the view taken by the Division Bench consisting of V.H. Bhairavia P.S. Patankar, JJ., on 21st/24th October, 1994 in Criminal Appeal No. 416 of 1993 by observing that the view taken therein requires reconsideration in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in (Mohinder Kumar v. The State of Panaji)1, A.I.R. 1995 S.C. 1157.

2. In Mohinder Kumar's case, the Investigation Officer was not an empowered officer and on coming to know about the accused person being in custody of offending articles, he was required to follow the procedure prescribed under section 42 of the Act before carrying out further search and seizure. The person of the accused was searched and two packets of charas were recovered and samples from the said packets were taken. In that context the Court observed that he did not adhere to the provisions of section 50 of the Act and in that he did not inform the person to be searched that if he would like to be taken to a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, a requirement which has been held to be mandatory in Balbir Singh's cas

Click Here to Read the rest of this document