Back
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Benjamin Basumatary @ Binjamin Basumatary, S/o. Bernut Basumatary @ Beranath Basumatary – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by PP, Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Susmita Phukan Khaund, J.
Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the appellant Benjamin Basumatary @ Binjamin Basumatary and Mr. R. Baruah, learned counsel for the appellant Smt. Moni Basumatary as well as Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent State.
2. The appellant Smt. Moni Basumatary has brought up this Criminal Appeal No. 14/2022 and the appellant Sri Benjamin Basumatary @ Binjamin Basumatary has brought up the Criminal Appeal No. 16/2022 as they are aggrieved by the judgment dated 15.12.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 02 of 2018 convicting the appellants under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act for short) and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 8 (Eight) years each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) each with default stipulation.
3. The genesis of the case was that on a tip off, a search operation was conducted under the name and style of “Operation Dekargaon” under the leadership of Subedar A. Kipgen along with civilian police force at about 09.15 hours on
Conscious possession is essential for conviction under the NDPS Act, and failure to comply with procedural safeguards 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.
As per section 55 of Act of 1985, police is required to take charge of articles seized or delivered and keep in safe custody pending order of Magistrate.
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.
Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act regarding search and seizure must be strictly followed; failure to do so can lead to acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
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
