INDERMEET KAUR
VIMAL KUMAR BAHL – Appellant
Versus
DRI – Respondent
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
1. On 17.4.2001 at about 9.30 AM pursuant to a secret information dated 16.04.2001 Ex. PW12/A received by A. K. Prasad PW-12 the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Headquarters, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the DRI) intercepted two cars bearing registration No.DL-3CQ-4785, a silver grey coloured Matiz car and DL-9C-3785 a white coloured Maruti car at the National Highway No.8, opposite Shiv Temple, Delhi-Gurgaon Road, Delhi. The occupant of the Maruti car introduced himself as Vimal Kumar Bahl and the occupant of the Matiz car introduced himself as Surender Raj Singh. The said cars were being driven by the said respective persons.
2. Investigative team was headed by P.R.Lakra PW-4 and joined by D.P.Saxena PW-2 and Sudhir Puthran PW-3. The DRI officials informed the apprehended persons that they were to be searched and if they so wished they have a right of getting their search effected either in the presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate. Notice under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) was served upon each of the two apprehended persons. The said
Abdul Rashid Ibrahim Mansuri v. State of Gujrat AIR 2001 SC 821
Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal (1994) 2 SCC 220
Gagan Kanojia v. State of Punjab 2007(2) Supreme 23
Khet Singh v. Union of India (2002) 4 SCC 380
Noor Aga v. State of Punjab & Anr. 2008 (9) Scale 681
Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India & Ors. (1990) 2 SCC 409
State of Punjab v. Makhan Chand (2004) 3 SCC 453
T. Shanker Prasad v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2004 (1) JCC 200
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.