IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJIV ROY, J.
Cr. App. (SJ) No. 4942 of 2023 in Cr. App. (DB) No. 635 of 2022
(25.3.2025)
Sanjay Mahto Kewat ... Appellant
vs.
State of Bihar & Anr. ... Respondents
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Sections 20(b)(ii) C and 23C read with Section 52-A – Nine packets of Charas weighing 4.5 Kg. seized from the appellant – In terms of Section 52-A(2)C) of the NDPS Act, representative samples of the seized materials has to be drawn in the presence of Magistrate – In the present case, Section 51A of the NDPS Act was given a go by – After seizure and checking of the materials through detection kit having found prima facie it to 'Charas', all the nine packets were opened, 25 gms. Each of samples were drawn, the packets were marked as A while the two samples were marked as AS1 and AS2 – The entire process was conducted in the absence of the Magistrate – As settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in absence of prosecution having followed Section 52(A) of 'the NDPS Act', the accused is/are entitled for relief – Prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt – Impugned order set aside – appellant acquitted of all the charges. (Paras 29, 30 & 38)
Rajiv Roy, J. – Heard the parties.
2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 06.06.2022 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah in N.D.P.S. Case No. 152 of 2018, NCB Case No. 23 of 2018 and Special Case No. 18 of 2018 by which the appellant has been convicted under section 20(b)(ii)C and 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (henceforth for short ‘the NDPS Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. One Lakh (Rs.1,00,000/-) on each count and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution story which led to the initiation/conclusion of the trial and the conviction of the appellant is that on 02.05.2018, the SSB 47 Battalion, Inerwa Head, Raj Kumar Kumawat got information that a person with ‘Charas’ is going to cross pillar no. 413 to enter India from Nepal. Accordingly, a team was formed which reached the Inerwa near pillar no. 413 of India-Nepal Border. Two persons were seen coming, when they were asked to stop, tried to escape. While one managed to escape towards Nepal, the other one (appellant) was caught in the presence of two independent persons, Prem Kumar Yadav and Sushil Yadav, a search was conducted, nine packets in brown polythene was seized.
4. The man gave his name as Sanjay Mahto Kewat (appellant). It weighed 4.5 Kilogram and upon checking from the detection kit, it was prima facie found ‘Charas’ like substance. It was opened and two samples of 25 gram each from the all nine packets were taken out. All the nine packets were marked A while the samples were marked AS1 and AS2. After the sealing, ‘Charas’ was again weighed. It came to 4.450 Kilogram.
5. The accused upon query informed that for Rs.1,000/-, he was carrying the material given to him by one Saheb Yadav of Nepal which was to be handed over to one Lakhsman Sharma at Raxaul. The accused was arrested and handed over to the NCB, Patna which came from Patna. The seized material was sent to the Malkhana and on the order of the court, the samples were sent to the Central Revenues Control Laboratory, Kolkata for its examination.
6. The Police thereafter submitted charge-sheet on 26.10.2018, the charges were framed on 05.11.2018 under section 20(b)(ii)(C) 23(c) and 29 of ‘the NDPS Act’. As the appellant claimed himself to be he claimed innocent, the trial.
7. The prosecution side produced the following witnesses to prove its case: –
| PW-1 | Raj Kumar Kumawat |
| PW-2 | Anil Kumar Prasad (Informant) |
| PW-3 | Prem Kumar Yadav (Independent witness) |
| PW-4 | Sushil Yadav (Independent witness) |
| PW-5 | Ashok Kumar Rai |
| PW-6 | Rajan Kumar |
8. The exhibits that were produced before the court is/are as follows: –
| izn'kZ 1 | lafnXèk lat; egrks dsoV dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 50 ds vUrxZr uksfVLk |
| izn'kZ 2 | lafnXèk lat; egrks dsoV dk O;fDrxr ryk'kh eseks |
| izn'kZ 3 | tCrh dk izksQkekZ |
| izn'kZ 4 | vo:} oLrq dk izksQkekZ |
| izn'kZ 5 | vojksèk eseks |
| izn'kZ 6 | tIrh izfØ;k esa lfEefyr ,lŒ,lŒchŒ dfeZ;ksa dh lwph |
| izn'kZ 7 ls 10 | lsukuk;d jktdqekj dqekor] ,lŒ,lŒchŒ bZujok }kjk ,uŒlhŒchŒ iVuk dks ?kVuk dh fyf[kr lwpuk |
| izn'kZ 8 | lat; egrks dsoV dk fpfdRldh; tk¡p fjiksVZ |
| izn'kZ 9 | ,uŒlhŒchŒ }kjk ryk'kh≶ tIrh lwph ,oa fjiksVZ |
| izn'kZ 10 | vfHk;qDr lat; egrks dsoV dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 67 ds varxZr uksfVl |
| izn'kZ 10@1 | lk{kh izse dqekj ;kno dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 67 ds varxZr uksfVl |
| izn'kZ 10@2 | lk{kh lq'khy dqekj ;kno dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 67 ds varxZr uksfVl |
| izn'kZ 10@3 | to 10@4 vfHk;qDr y{e.k 'kekZ dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 67 ds varxZr uksfVl |
| izn'kZ 11 | vfHk;qDr lat; egrks dsoV dks ,uŒMhŒihŒ,lŒ ,DV dh èkkjk 67 ds varxZr uksfVl |
| izn'kZ 11@1 | xokg izse dqekj ;kno vkSj lq'khy ; |
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....
Procedural non-compliance with the NDPS Act regarding search, seizure, and evidence handling resulted in acquittal, establishing that failure to follow mandated protocols undermines prosecution's cas....
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
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.
(1) Section 52A of NDPS Act is a mandatory rule of evidence – When there is non-compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act, where a certification of a Magistrate is lacking any inventory, photograph or li....
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in narcotics cases.
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.