Failure to inform an accused of their rights under Section 50 of the NDPS Act constitutes a violation that can prejudice the accused, resulting in acquittal due to insufficient evidence.

JUDGMENT :

RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. This acquittal appeal filed by the Appellant/State arises out of the judgment dated 04.05.2015 passed by the Special Judge under NDPS Act, Durg, C.G. in NDPS Case No.14/2014, whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent herein of the charge under Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as 'NDPS Act') on the basis of benefit of doubt.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.07.2014, PW-6 Smt. Daya Kurre, In-charge Sub-Inspector, received a secret information from the informant that the respondent, who is travelling in Ahmedabad - Howrah Express (General Coach), is carrying brown sugar for sale in Nagpur. Upon receiving this information, PW-6 Smt. Daya Kurre reduced the same into writing in the Roznamcha Sanha (Ex.P-19). She then summoned witnesses through a constable and proceeded to the spot along with police personnel. At the spot, she apprehended the respondent near the gate of train and informed about the information received by her from informer. In compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act, a notice (Ex.P-4) was given to the respondent. Thereafter, personal search of the police party and the witnesses was also made by the respondent. As per the consent of the respondent, PW-6 Smt. Daya Kurre along with other police personnel searched the respondent (vide Ex. P-5) in the presence of witnesses and found a dark-coloured narcotic substance wrapped in a white polythene bag, which was kept in the right pocket of his full-length pants. Thereafter, PW-6 Smt. Daya Kurre, by smelling and touching the substance, identified it to be brown sugar and prepared the identification panchnama vide Ex. P-7. When the recovered substance was weighed in presence of the witnesses, it was found to be 105 gms. Two sample packets were prepared by taking 10 grams of brown sugar each from the seized material vide Ex. P-9. Thereafter, the samples were sealed and a sample seal panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P-10 and vide Ex.P-11, seizure memo of alleged substance was prepared. After completion of proceedings, FIR (Ex.P-25) was registered against the respondent and information about the same was sent to the CJM, Durg vide Ex.P-26. After that, PW-6 Smt. Daya Kurre handed over the sealed seized packets to PW-4 Permanand Bhoi to keep it in safe custody and after making the necessary entry in the store register, the remaining seized articles were sent to Malkhana vide Ex.P-16. Thereafter, statements of the witnesses were recorded and seized samples packets were sent to FSL for chemical examination vide Ex.P-24 and as per FSL report (Ex.P-30), the recovered substance was found to be brown sugar. Accused/respondent was taken into custody vide Ex.P-13.

3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused/respondent before the Special Judge under NDPS Act, Durg. The respondent abjured the guilt and entered into defence.

4. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 6 witnesses and exhibited 30 documents in support of case of the prosecution. In his defence, the respondent has examined none and not exhibited any document.

5. The learned trial Court, after hearing counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment acquitted the accused/respondent herein of said charge leveled against him.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant/State submits that the trial Court is unjustified in acquitting the accused/respondent herein of said charge by