IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(NAGPUR BENCH)
S.G. Mahajan, J.
Noorkhan @ Nuru Rahimkhan Khan.... Appellant.
Versus
State of Maharashtra.... Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 148 of 2000, decided on 24/25-7-2001.
Advocates appeared :
M.R. Daga and R.M. Daga, for appellant.
S.S. Doifode, A.P.P., for respondent.
N.D.P.S. Act - Conviction under section 21 - Compliance of provisions under N.D.P.S. Act - Notification authorizing police officers to conduct raid, search, and seizure - Compliance of section 50(1) - Explanation of accused's entitlement to be searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate - Seizure and analysis of contraband - Compliance of section 57 - Testimony of witnesses and panch witnesses
Fact of the Case:
Accused challenged the order of conviction and sentence under section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The prosecution's case involved the raid, search, and seizure of brown sugar from the accused. The accused contended non-compliance of provisions under the N.D.P.S. Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the raid, search, and seizure were conducted in compliance with the N.D.P.S. Act. The court held that the accused's entitlement to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate was explained. The court also found that the contraband was seized and analyzed in accordance with the Act. The compliance report submitted by the police officer was deemed sufficient.
Issues: The issues involved non-compliance of provisions under the N.D.P.S. Act, including authorization for raid, search, and seizure, explanation of accused's entitlement to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, and the seizure and analysis of contraband. The testimony of witnesses and panch witnesses was also contested.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the raid, search, and seizure were conducted in compliance with the N.D.P.S. Act, and the accused's entitlement to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate was adequately explained. The court also found that the contraband was seized and analyzed in accordance with the Act. The compliance report submitted by the police officer was deemed sufficient. The court also noted that the testimony of witnesses and panch witnesses supported the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence under section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act were upheld.
2. The case of the prosecution is as follows :---
(A) At the relevant time, Head Constable Pali was attached to Crime Branch, Narcotic Cell, Nagpur. On 18-5-1998, around 9.40 a.m., after taking the station diary entry, Head Constable Pali, P.S.I. Tidke and other police staff made a departure from the office of Crime Branch for collection of the information about the Narcotic Drugs and effecting the raids. At about 11.30 a.m., while the aforesaid police officials were in the ground near R.S.S. Building, Head Constable Pali received an information that near Shahi Masjid in Mahal Castle area, a person by name Nuru was selling brown sugar to the customers. Head Constable Pali reduced the information in writing on a paper. Then he prepared the F.I.R. and submitted the same to the Police Inspector, Narcotic Cell, Crime Branch, Nagpur, through Police Constable Prem Chand. Head Constable Pali then called two persons from the passers by to act as panch witnesses. When Head Constable Pali was informing the above panch witnesses in respect of the information received by him about the brown sugar. P.I. Madavi arrived there. P.I. Madavi, P.S.I. Tidke, Head Constable Pali and other police staff alongwith panchas proceeded towards Mahal Castle area.
(B) The Jeep was stopped and the above police officials and panchas went towards Shahi Masjid in east-west lane. The accused/appellant was noticed at that place. Head Constable Pali apprised him of the information received and told him that he wanted to take his search. Head Constable Pali informed the accused/appellant that if he desired, his search could be arranged in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. Head Constable Pali issued a written intimation to the accused/appellant in that respect as required under section 50(1) of the N.D.P.S. Act. The accused told that he could not read or write, but he could put signature only, in Urdu. The accused stated that he did not require the presence of any Officer. An endorsement to that effect was therefore made by Head Constable Pali below which the accused put his signature.
(C) Head Constable Pali, other Police Officers and the staff as well as panchas offered their searches. The accused refused to take their search. Head Constable Pali then took the search of the person of the accused. In the watch pocket of the full pant of the accused, four small plastics bags were found. The packets were containing brown sugar (Heroin). Head Constable Pali collected the contents of all the four packets on a plain paper. The contents were weighed. They weighed one gram. Head Constable Pali then took two papers and obtained signatures of the accused and panch witnesses on them and also put his signature. The powder of Brown Sugar was packed in the plain paper. It was again packed in a packet which was prepared by using one of the aforesaid two papers. The said packet was sealed and marked as S-1. Another paper out of the above two papers was used for packing the empty packets. This packet was also sealed and the same was marked as P-1. In the personal search of the accused, H.C. Pali also found the amount of Rs. 1,070/-. The same was taken by H.C. Pali in his custody. The search of the house of the accused was also taken put no contraband was found there. H.C. Pali informed the accused that he had committed the offence under the N.D.P.S. Act and he was, therefore, arresting him H.C. Pali then drew the panchanama of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.