IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJIV ROY, J.
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1231 of 2023
(4.2.2025)
Deepak Kumar Rai ... Appellant
vs.
State of Bihar ... Respondent
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Section 20(b)(ii)(c) read with Sections 50 & 52 – 215.400 kg. 'ganja' seized from the vehicle (car) – Search conducted by the police which does not fully Section 50 of the Act which talks about the search to be conducted either in the presence of the Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate and in case the same is not possible, immediately thereafter and with 72 hours, an information has to be sent to the immediate Superior Officer, which was never done – Under Section 52(a)(c) of the Act, the representative samples has to be drawn in the presences of the Magistrate which shall be certify its correctness for which a proper application has to be presented before it – Here, the Police Official immediately after the seizer opened the seized items, 25 gm. each of two samples were prepared from some of the packets where after, the same was sealed – This was in complete breach of Section 52(a)c) of "The NDPS Act" – The seized materials were never produced before the Trial Court and though the prosecution side repeatedly harped that it was deposited in the "Malkhana", even the entry made could not be provided by them – In the absence of the seized materials having been presented before the Court and/or any certificate showing that it has been destroyed in accordance with law, the entire story of seizure of 215.400 kg. of 'ganja" falls – Prosecution has completely failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the appellant is entitled for the benefit of doubt – Impugned conviction and sentence set aside – Appeal allowed.
(Paras 32, 36, 37 & 42)
Union of India Vs. Mohanlal, (2016) 3 SCC 379 – Relied.
Rajiv Roy, J.—The present appeal has been preferred against the the judgment and order dated 13.01.2023 as also the sentence dated 16.01.2023 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-1 Purnia in Special Case No- 02/2016/CIS No.01/2016 arising out of Baisi P.S. Case No. 91/2016 dated 20.06.2016 by which the appellant has been convicted under section 20(b)(ii) (c) Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (henceforth for short ‘the NDPS Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. one lakh and in default, six months of simple imprisonment.
2. The prosecution story as read in the FIR is/are as follows:—
(i) on 20.06.2016 at 7:45 hours morning, the informant, Police Inspector cum S.H.O., Baisi Police Station namely Tarkeshwar Prasad Singh has recorded his statement at village Sadipur that while on 20.06.2016 at 00:30 hours, he was on patrolling duty and checking the vehicles along with the police force at Bausi, around 02:30 hours, they found a one car coming from Dalkola side. However, upon sight of the Police, the car took a turn with the intention to escape. The Police however, chased and was able to stop it. The Driver gave his name as Deepak Kumar Rai (the appellant herein) whereas another person gave his name a Karanbir Singh;
(ii) the further allegation is that the villagers have assembled there. On query, the accused persons failed to give satisfactory reply. Thereafter, in the presence of two local witnesses 1. Md. Sarbar and 2. Md. Raisul, the checking of the vehicle was made. Upon search from the dicky of the said vehicle (Honda City Car) having registration no. CG-11BB-1701, 42 packets were recovered and on weighing, it was found to be 215.400 kg ‘ganja’;
(iii) this followed the physical search in the presence of the aforesaid two independent witnesses and from the possession of Karanbir Singh, three mobiles and 19,000/- cash were recovered whereas from Deepak Kumar Rai, one mobile was recovered;
(iv) the informant further alleged that on the measurement taken by electronic measurement tools, the recovery/seizure were as follows:—
(i) 1st group of 22 packets contained 2.770 kg to 3.000 kg ‘ganja’;
(ii) 2nd group of 12 packets contained 3.820 to 5.730 kg ‘ganja’; and
(iii) 3rd group of 8 packets contained 7.130 kg to 12.700 kg.‘ganja’;
(v) after measurement, all the packets were seized in the presence of accused persons as also independent witness;
(vi) on the basis of aforesaid written report, FIR has been lodged against the appellant and another.
3. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, Karanbir Singh was found juvenile and as such, his case was separated. The charge-sheet came to be submitted on 31.10.2016, cognizance taken on 08.12.2016 and charges were framed on 21.01.2017 against the appellant who pleaded not guilty and this resulted into rolling of the trial.
4. During the trial, the prosecution side examined altogether 9 witnesses. They are as follows:—
(i) PW1-Swaminath Sah
(ii) PW2-ASI Lal Babu
(iii) PW3-Kaleshwar Paswan
(iv) PW4-Babu Lal Rai
(v) PW5- Tarkeshwar Prashad Singh (Informant)
(vi) PW6- Subash Chandra Mandal
(vii) PW7- Jitendra Rana
(viii) PW8- Md. Raisul. (Independent witness)
(ix) PW9-Md. Sarbar. (Independent witness)
5. The exhibits put forward by the prosecution is/are as follows:—
(i) Exhibit-1- Seizure list
(ii) Exhibit-2- Written Application.
(iii) Exhibit-3- Formal FIR.
(iv) Exhibit-4 and 4/A- Notices.
(v) Exhibit- 1/1 and 1/2 signatures on the seized packets 8 and 9.
(vi) Exhibit-5- Report of F.S.L., Patna.
(vii) Exhibit-6 Report of C.R.C.L., Kolkata.
6. P.W.1 Swaminath Sah – He was serving as the Reserve Guard in the Baisi Police Station. According to him, a White Car was found coming from Dalkola side. The Police tried to intercept the vehicle but the Driver took a turn to escape alongwith the Car. The Police chased the vehicle which left National Highway and entered Sadipurbhutaha village where it was finally intercepted. Those seated th
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....
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.
Strict compliance with statutory provisions under the NDPS Act is essential for upholding convictions; failure to produce seized contraband and lack of proper inventory preparation undermines the pro....
Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act regarding search and seizure must be strictly followed; failure to do so can lead to acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
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.