Back
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Lanahmai Stephen Thingao, S/o. Lanahmai Phaoshi Stephen – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Rep. By The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Arun Dev Choudhury, J.) :
1. Heard Mr. A.M. Bora, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. V.A Chowdhury, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Addl. PP, Assam.
2. The present appeal is filed under section 36B of the NDPS Act, 1985 read with section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C against the judgment and order of conviction dated 27.07.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS, Karbi Anglong whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.50,000/-for offence under section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1985) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for another 6 months.
3. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 08.05.2022 at around 11.15 PM, a black coloured Maruti Ciaz (without registration number) was stopped at the naka checking which was driven by one Lanahmai Stephen Tingao (A1) with Veipuh Prou @ Roku Baipu (A-2) as co passenger. On being checked, 1995.29 grams of suspected heroin was recovered from the dickey of the car. Seizure list was prepared and formal FIR was thereafter lodged by SI (UB) Lutfur Rahman.
4. On receipt of the FIR,
Strict compliance with procedural safeguards in narcotics cases is essential; failure to adhere to statutory requirements can lead to exclusion of evidence and acquittal.
Compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence; failure to adhere to its provisions can lead to acquittal.
Strict compliance with statutory provisions under the NDPS Act is essential for upholding convictions; failure to produce seized contraband and lack of proper inventory preparation undermines the pro....
The prosecution's failure to produce primary evidence of seized contraband under the NDPS Act vitiated the trial, leading to the reversal of the conviction.
Strict adherence to procedural safeguards in narcotics cases is essential; failure to comply can lead to acquittal.
Non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A, undermines the prosecution's case and warrants acquittal.
Recovery of contraband – Penal provisions of NDPS Act, 1985 prescribes very harsh punishment for offender and it is incumbent for prosecution side that mandatory procedural requirement to be followed....
The prosecution's failure to follow mandatory procedures for search and seizure under the NDPS Act vitiated the trial, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A regarding the presence of a Magistrate during sampling.
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
