Back
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Sharukh – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
These two appeals under Sections 374(2) of Cr.P.C arise out of judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.09.2022 passed by the Court of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar sitting at Basavakalyan in Special Case No.312/2021 and therefore the appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 19.02.2019 at about 9.45 a.m., near Gate-I of Humnabad Bus Stand within the limits of Humnabad Police Station, accused Nos.1 and 2 were found illegally transporting the contraband article – ganja, which totally weighed 30 kilogram. The accused were apprehended and from their possession ganja weighing 30 kilograms was seized and subjected to panchanama. Thereafter, the seized contraband article and the apprehended accused were brought to the police station and FIR in Crime No.24/2019 was registered. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii), 20(B) and 20(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’ for brevity
Seizure of Ganja – FSL report cannot be considered as primary evidence and in absence of primary evidence, trial gets vitiated.
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act regarding inventory certification renders evidence inadmissible, vitiating the trial.
Compliance with mandatory seizure procedures under Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential; failure to adhere results in inadmissibility of evidence and vitiation of conviction.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act in the seizure and handling of contraband substances, and the requirement for th....
Compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act is essential for establishing the prosecution's case, particularly the requirement for drawing samples in the presence of a Magistrate, which was ....
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of trial.
The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused under the NDPS Act due to non-compliance with statutory requirements and lack of credible evidence.
The prosecution's failure to produce primary evidence of seized contraband under the NDPS Act vitiated the trial, leading to the reversal of the conviction.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of strict compliance with the procedural provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A(2), (3) and (4), for seizure and s....
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
