Back
RAVINDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL
Kamlesh Jaiswal S/o Late Shyam Sunder Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through SHO Patna District Korea – Respondent
ORDER :
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
1. Both these appeals are arising out of the same crime number and the same sessions trial, therefore both are being heard and decided together.
2. Both these criminal appeals are filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of conviction and the sentence dated 21.10.2022, passed by learned Special Judge (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985), Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, in Special Criminal Case No. 7 of 2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as ‘NDPS Act’) and sentenced for R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 1 lakh to each of the appellants, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for 6 months.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 01.03.2020, a secret information was received by the police of Police Station Patna, District Korea, that a white colour Scorpio vehicle bearing No. CG-16/CL-8964 coming from Surajpur to Baikunthpur having loaded with Ganja. The witnesses were being called and secret information Panchn
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, especially in drug-related offenses, where compliance with mandatory procedures is crucial.
Confession of accused recorded by a Police Officer is not admissible in evidence as the same is hit by Section 25 of Evidence Act.
Non-examination of independent witnesses is not fatal to the prosecution in NDPS cases; minor sampling irregularities do not undermine the case’s integrity, and mandatory sentences under the NDPS Act....
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.
Prosecution must adhere to strict evidential procedures in NDPS Act cases; failure undermines the conviction. In this case, inconsistencies in evidence and chain of custody led to acquittal.
The court emphasized the necessity for strict adherence to procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, ruling that non-compliance rendered the prosecution's case unsustainable.
Strict adherence to procedural requirements in the NDPS Act is essential for securing convictions; failure to follow these mandates can lead to acquittal.
The prosecution must comply with mandatory procedures for seizure and sampling under the NDPS Act, and failure to do so undermines the conviction.
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
