Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANDEEP KUMAR
Surendra Sah @ Surender Sah Kanu @ Surender Shah, son of late Dawga Sah @ Surender Patel – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal process initiated after conviction (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of the arrest and evidence collection (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. issues regarding legality of search and seizure (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. analysis of procedural violations in arrest (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 5. conclusion of acquittal from charges (Para 44 , 45 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP KUMAR, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant against the judgment of conviction dated 06.07.2020 and the order of sentence dated 07.07.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Champaran, Bettiah, in Trial No.07 of 2019, whereby the appellant has been convicted under sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( for short “N.D.P.S. Act”). For the offence under section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) was imposed, and in the event of failure of depositing the fine imposed, the appellant was directed to undergo
In drug-related offenses, strict adherence to statutory procedural safeguards is mandatory for a fair trial, and non-compliance vitiates the prosecution case.
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.
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....
Compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act is essential for conviction; however, the absence of independent witnesses does not automatically discredit credible police testimony.
The court upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused due to significant procedural violations and lack of evidence connecting them to the alleged drug possession.
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
