Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI
Farida Mirza, Wd/o. Late Chand Kha Mirza – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Police Out Post Karhi Bazar Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the CrPC, against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.5.2022 passed by Special Judge (NDPS), Baloda Bazar, Distt. Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara (CG) in Special Criminal (NDPS) Case No. 04/2018, whereby the learned Special Judge, after holding the appellant guilty, convicted and sentenced her in the following manner:-
| Sl.No. | Conviction under Section | Jail Sentence | FineSentence | Defaultstipulation |
| 01. | 20(b)(ii)(C)of NDPS Act | RI for 10 years | Rs.1,00,000/- | RI for 01 year |
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.02.2018 at about 02:30pm, an information was received by Sub Inspector RS Singh (PW-16) of Police Chouki, Karhibazar, Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar that the appellant/accused had illegally stored contraband substance Ganja in her house with intention to sell it. The information was reduced in writing by him in Rojnamchasanha (EX-P/25C). After calling two witnesses namely Heeraram and Amardas Manikpuri, mukhbir Suchna Panchnama (Ex-P/2) was prepared. Thereafter fearing the possibility of mishandling of the contraband substance or concealment of evidence,
The failure to comply with procedural requirements of the NDPS Act, particularly regarding evidence handling and sample collection, undermines the prosecution's case and grounds for conviction.
Conviction under NDPS Act overturned due to significant procedural lapses and discrepancies in evidence handling, resulting in reasonable doubt.
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 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....
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
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 failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused under the NDPS Act due to non-compliance with statutory requirements and lack of credible evidence.
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
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
