Back
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Braja Baral – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)
The instant appeal is preferred against the Judgment and Order of conviction dated 20.11.2008 & 21.11.2008 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge Special Court under N.D.P.S. Act, Cooch Behar in G.R. Case No.136/2003 under Section 20 (b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, convicting the appellants and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each, in default, to pay fine, suffer simple imprisonment for five months more.
2. The prosecution case precisely stated on 10.09.2003 at about 7:10 P.M., the accused who jointly possessed Ganja of 2.1KG+2.1KG+1.9KG respectively at Balarampur, Chowpathi, Tufangunj, were apprehended by the police and on enquiry they failed to produce any valid documents and a license violating the provision of Section 8 of the NDPS Act.
3. Consequently, G.R. Case No.136/2003 was initiated on 16.09.2003 before Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tufangunj. After completion of investigation, initiated on the basis of First Information Report being 84/03 dated 10.09.2003. Charge-sheet was submitted against the three accused persons out of which accused Manik
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act does not vitiate the trial but renders the recovery suspect. The burden of proving a satisfactory explanation for possession lies with the ....
Substantial compliance with statutory requirements for search and seizure, and the applicability of specific sections of the N.D.P.S. Act to the facts of the case.
Non-compliance with statutory provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act regarding search and seizure vitiates the prosecution case, warranting acquittal on grounds of reasonable doubt.
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, such as section 42(2) and section 50(4), can render the prosecution case doubtful and lead to acquittal.
Non-compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards under Section 50 of the NDPS Act vitiates the prosecution case, entitling the accused to the benefit of doubt.
The court found the accused guilty of possession of Ganja based on consistent evidence from witnesses and dismissed the appeal.
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
