SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1439

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Ilesh J. Vora, P. M. Raval, JJ.
Sujit Tiwary S/O Acchebarnath Tiwary - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Misc.Application (For Suspension of Sentence) No. 1 of 2024 In R/Criminal Appeal No. 692 of 2024
Decided On : 08-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr Jal Soli Unwala, Senior Advocate With Vishal K Anandjiwala, Mr Yash V Gupta
For the Respondent: Mr Ankit Shah, Mr L B Dabhi, APP

The court emphasized that electronic evidence requires proper certification to be admissible, and insufficient evidence can undermine a conviction in drug-related crimes.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8(c), 21(c), 23(c), 25 and 29 - Application for suspension of sentence - The petitioner, convicted for abetment and conspiracy in drug trafficking, argues lack of admissible evidence against him, particularly focusing on call detail records and confessional statements. The trial court relied on such evidence which is deemed insufficient for conviction without corroborative proof and the mandated certificate. (Paras 3, 7, 11, 12, 13)

(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 65B(4) - Admissibility of electronic evidence - The court reiterated that electronic evidence must include appropriate certification as per established legal standards to be admissible. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was convicted in a drug trafficking case involving significant quantities of narcotics hidden aboard a vessel. He contended that he was not a crewmember and didn’t possess the drugs. (Para 4)

Findings of Court:
The Court highlighted that the prosecution failed to provide compelling evidence linking the applicant to the crime and deemed the conviction unsustainable based on unsubstantiated electronic evidence. (Paras 11, 12)

Issues: Whether there exists sufficient evidence to warrant the suspension of sentence and the granting of bail. (Para 11)

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that without proper admissibility of electronic evidence and substantial proof of active involvement in crime, the charges could not hold against the accused. (Paras 11, 12)

Result: Application for suspension of sentence granted.

Table of Content
1. overview of facts surrounding the case (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. court's examination of applicable law (Para 6 , 11)
3. arguments from the defense regarding evidence admissibility (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. court's reasoning on suspension of sentence (Para 10 , 12)
5. order granting suspension of sentence (Para 13)

ORDER :

ILESH J. VORA, J.

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent-State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.

2. By way of this application under Section 430 (1) of BNSS , 2023, the applicant-original accused no.9 – Sujit Tiwary, seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the Sessions Court concerned for the offence punishable under Sections 8 (c), 21(c), 23(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated 29.01.2024 and order of sentence passed in Special NDPS Case No. 1 of 2017, whereby the applicant herein was convicted and sentenced as under:

SectionImprisonmentFineIn default
S.8(c), 21(c) of NDPS ActRI for 10 yrsRs.1000 00SI for 1 month
S.23(c), 25 & 29 of NDPS ActRI for 10 yrsRs.1000 00

4. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file appeal as well as present application are as follows:

4.1 The applicant-accused A-9 along with 12 persons had been tried for the offences mentioned hereinabove. The learned trial court after appreciation of the evidence and hearing the parties, convicted the accused and sentenced them as per the aforesaid schedule. The case of the prosecution unfolded during the trial is that, the Indian Coast Guard (ICG) received intelligence input with regard to suspicious activities of a ship MV – Hennry. Therefore, the ICG took their own ship and intercepted the vessel on 29.07.2017 which was having a flag of Panama. The Master of the ship was A-1 Suprit Tiwary and there were seven other crew members (A-2 to A-8), all Indian Nationals. The officials of the ICG found the narcotic substance alleged to have been hidden in two cavities of the vessel, modified in two tanks on both the sides. The quantity of the narcotics approximately 1445 kilogram (101.8 kilogram heroine and 427 kilogram morphene) wrapped in the 1526 packets. The ICG informed the Narcotics Control Bureau, Ahmedabad (NCB). The team of NCB officials came to Porbandar Jetti – Gujarat where the vessel was brought by the ICG. The officials of the ICG handed over a letter for taking possession of the items listed in the inventory to the NCB. Thereafter, the Intelligence Officer, 8 crew members and witnesses along with narcotic substance came to Old S.P. Office, Porbandar for further proceedings. The NCB after following the proper procedure as envisaged under the NDPS Act, seized and recovered the contraband and samples were also drawn from 52 packets (A-1 to AZ-2). The eight persons who were on crew, had been detained and arrested and their statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act had also been recorded. During the investigation, it revealed that, the A-1 was working for an Iranian National Saiyedali Moniri and it was Saiyedali who purchased the heroin and parked the same in the cavities made in the ship and had offered huge amount to the Master – A-1 and crew members for illegal transportation. The contraband was supposed to be travelled to Egypt, but due to some incident, the Captain – A1 was afraid to travel Egypt and ship was diverted towards India. In such circumstances, the conspiracy to import prohibited narcotics into India allegedly hatched in connivance with the Iranian and Pakistani citizens. The contraband brought to India and it was intended to brought at Porbandar for unloading and sell of the contraband. As a part of conspiracy, the A1 - Suprit Tiwary, in order to upload and sell, he contacted and talked with A-10 – Vishalkumar Yadav and A-11 – Irfan Shaikh and made conversation with each other about the uploading and sell of the contraband. A-1 – Captain was in contact with his brother -present applicant A - 9 Sujit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top