Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Mitali Thakuria
Ali Hussain @ Dukhiya S/O Late Jalal Uddin – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam Rep. By Pp. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MITALI THAKURIA, J.
Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. This is an appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order dated 01.10.2022, passed by the learned Special Judge No. 2, Nagaon in Special NDPS Case No. 194/2021, convicting the accused/appellant under Section 22(C) of NDPS Act and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default to undergo further S.I. for 6 months.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that an ejahar dated 23.09.2021 was lodged by one Ajay Barman, Officer-In-Charge, Dhing Police Station (PW-3), alleging that a secret information was received on 22.09.2021, at about 8.10 a.m., from a reliable source that the accused/appellant went to Dimapur to procure illegal arms and was returning on the same date by a bus along with arms. The said information was accordingly shared with Additional S.P. (HQ). Later on, the informant received the information from the Officer-In-Charge, Dillai P.S. (Karbi Anglong) that they have detained the appellant along with one
The prosecution must comply with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act, and possession of narcotics can be established through actual or constructive possession, with the burden of proof shifting ....
The prosecution must comply with mandatory procedural requirements in drug cases, failing which foundational facts required to establish guilt cannot be met, leading to acquittal.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence for conviction; procedural lapses are not fatal unless shown to cause prejudice to the accused.
Strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 42(1) and 42(2) of the NDPS Act is required, and the prosecution must establish the accused's conscious possession of the contraband.
The prosecution must establish a prima facie case and prove the chain of custody for contraband under the NDPS Act; failure to do so undermines the conviction.
The court affirmed that possession of contraband substances establishes statutory presumptions requiring defendants to prove lack of conscious possession under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Sub....
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
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 prosecution must establish possession of contraband beyond reasonable doubt, and procedural lapses do not invalidate the trial if essential elements are proven.
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
