Back
B. P. DESHPANDE
Roque – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Appellant is challenging the judgment dtd. 28/10/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, North Goa, Mapusa in Special Criminal Case No.22/2015. By this judgment, the Appellant/Accused was found guilty for the offences punishable under Sec. 8(c) and Sec. 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and accordingly, convicted for the said offences and further, sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay fine of ?1,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine, Accused was further directed to undergo imprisonment for one year.
2. Heard learned Counsel Ms Caroline Collasso with Advocate Mr Kamlakant Poulekar for the Appellant and Mr Pravin Faldessai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent.
3. According to the charge framed against Accused, the case of the Prosecution is that on 20/12/2014, between 20:15 hours to 24:00 hours, at Blue Colour Kiosk, having Glowing sign board of Amul, situated at Starco Junction at Anjuna, Bardez, Goa, Accused was found in illegal possession of 24 pieces/papers weighing 0.25 grams suspected to contain LSD being commercial quantity and without any authority. Accordingly, FIR
The court established that compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act is mandatory, and the weight of LSD-laden papers is considered in determining commercial quantity under the Act.
Point of law: Recovery of contraband – Rejection of bail - contraband article is more than the commercial quantity and the investigation is still pending
The court ruled that a joint communication concerning rights under the NDPS Act violated procedural safeguards, resulting in insufficient evidence for conviction.
The court affirmed that possession of 201 kilograms of ganja established under the NDPS Act sufficed for conviction, confirming that procedural safeguards were adhered to despite the absence of indep....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of culpable mental state and possession under Section 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act, and the court's reliance on the prosecution's evid....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with statutory provisions, the veracity of evidence, and the benefit of doubt in criminal cases.
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and contradictions in evidence undermine the prosecution's case, leading to the reversal of conviction.
The prosecution must strictly adhere to the procedural requirements of the NDPS Act to ensure a fair trial, and non-compliance can lead to acquittal.
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
