Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Leelam Devi Singh @ Leelam Devi W/o Ajay Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Director, NCB, Patna – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis of the appellants' conviction (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. appellants' denial of charges during trial (Para 8 , 9 , 12) |
| 3. mandatory principles of ndps act are crucial for legal validity. (Para 28) |
| 4. issues with the search and seizure process (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. mandatory provisions under ndps act not followed (Para 34) |
| 6. acquittal of appellants and conclusion of appeal (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
JUDGMENT :
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/convicts under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 01.03.2024 and order of sentence dated 07.03.2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Court No.II under NDPS Act, East Champaran, Motihari in NDPS Case No. 13 of 2018 (arising out of NCB/PZU/V/10/2018), whereby the concerned Trial Court has convicted both above named appellants for the offence punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii) (c) and 23 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS’) and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the off
The failure to comply with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act regarding search and seizure renders the conviction suspect, requiring acquittal.
Compliance with the provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act is not required where personal search of the body of the accused is not involved, and the provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act are not....
In drug-related offenses, strict adherence to statutory procedural safeguards is mandatory for a fair trial, and non-compliance vitiates the prosecution case.
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 comply with mandatory procedural requirements in drug cases, failing which foundational facts required to establish guilt cannot be met, leading to acquittal.
Non-compliance with the procedure for drawing up the sample of the narcotic, lack of compliance with the prescribed procedure under the NDPS Act, 1985 at all the stages, and the case being based on t....
The conviction was quashed due to failure to comply with mandatory procedures for evidence collection under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
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
