Back
NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Arun Sah Son Of Late Mahadev Sah – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I have already herd the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned APP for the State.
2. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant against the judgment of conviction dated 30.11.2022 and order of sentence dated 20.12.2022, passed by learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, N.D.P.S.Act, Muzaffarpur in N.D.P.S. Case No. 11 of 2020, arising out of Sakra P.S.Case No. 78 of 2020, whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and section 22(C) of the N.D.P.S.Act, hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Act’, and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for ten years and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) and Section 22(c), respectively, of the Act. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine amount, the appellant was further directed to undergo S.I. for two years.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant Rajesh Kumar, ASI (P.W.3), got a secret information that the appellant and one Sonu Sah had concealed ganja in their scrap shop. The informant entered sanha no. 805 in the station diary on 26.02.2020 and after informing the superior officials, he
Non-compliance with statutory requirements for search and seizure under the NDPS Act renders the prosecution's case doubtful, leading to the reversal of conviction.
The court emphasized the necessity for strict adherence to procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, ruling that non-compliance rendered the prosecution's case unsustainable.
(1) Admission of accused during course of his interrogation cannot be made admissible in evidence. (2) Fair trial is a constitutional guarantee to an accused under Article 21. Fair trial includes fai....
Procedural lapses in evidence collection under the NDPS Act, particularly failure to comply with Section 52A, render prosecution's case insufficient for conviction.
Compliance with mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act is crucial, and non-compliance may lead to the acquittal of the accused despite the presence of evidence.
The prosecution failed to establish the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, revealing critical inconsistencies and procedural lapses in adhering to the NDPS Act.
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....
Failures and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, including unexplained delay in informing the police, contradictions in the evidence of prosecution's witnesses, and failure to produce the seiz....
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
