SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Bom) 170

ANOOP V.MOHTA, S.S.PARKAR
B. B. Hugar – Appellant
Versus
Naushad Hasan Pathan – Respondent


Judgment

( 1 ) THE respondents were charged, tried, but acquitted of the offence under Sections 18,25,20 (b) (i) of the Narcotic drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for short "ndps Act"]. Therefore, present appeal against acquittal by the appellant.

( 2 ) AS per the prosecution, on 9th october, 1988, on information, a raid was conducted by the Officers of the appellant- central Excise and Customs Preventive, Pune, of the premises, comprising of two rooms, having its Municipal House No. 7 and owned by respondent No. 2, in Village- Phaltan, and found 1. 340 kgs. of "ganja" under the sofa, and opium, weighing 52 gms. , in the pocket of respondent No. 1. After receiving the information, completed the formalities, including issuance of an authorisation under section 41 (2) of the NDPS Act by the competent authorities only in the name of respondent No. 2, without mentioning the house number. The detail and purpose of the raid was explained to the Panchas. The Panchas were also searched. Nothing was found in the course of the said search. The raiding team reached to the premises in question. The door of the house was open. When called, respondent No. 1 naushad Hasan Pathan came o























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top