Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, KOHIMA BENCH
Mridul Kumar Kalita
Pfonyi Koza S/o Vizohu Koza – Appellant
Versus
State of Nagaland, Kohima – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sentiyanger, the learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K. V. Angami, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Nagaland.
2. This appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the appellant, namely, Pfonyi Khoza, impugning the judgment and order dated 03.04.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS) Phek, in Sessions (Special) Case No.03/2022, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 05/2022 in connection with Pfutsero P.S. Case No.0001/2022, whereby, the appellant was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and was sentenced to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 10(ten) years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/-and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 6(six) months.
3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are as follows:
(i) On 19.01.2022, one UBC Kedukro Tero had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Pfutsero Police Station Phek, inter-alia, alleging that with reference to DGP order No. vide PHG(CON-II)72/AE/2021/1789 dated 11.01.2022 and Superintendent of Police, Phek Order No. DEF/PK/CB- 110/2022-23/7
Search and seizure conducted by an unauthorized officer under the NDPS Act renders the conviction illegal; prosecution must prove compliance with mandatory provisions.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt in NDPS Act cases, and non-compliance with statutory provisions vitiates the trial.
Point of Law : NDPS Act – Search and seizer of Contraband - Hostility of independent witnesses was not something new to criminal court and such hostility by itself cannot deliver any advantage to the....
The prosecution must establish foundational facts regarding possession and seizure under the NDPS Act before the burden shifts to the accused, or the case fails.
The court held that non-compliance with the provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly relating to authorization of officers for search and seizure, invalidated the conviction.
Mandatory compliance with statutory provisions under the NDPS Act is essential for lawful search and seizure; deviations may compromise evidential integrity and lead to wrongful convictions.
The court upheld the conviction under the NDPS Act, establishing that procedural compliance and evidence corroborate guilt for possession of contraband.
Procedural lapses in narcotics investigations under NDPS Act can lead to dismissal of convictions, requiring strict adherence to statutory requirements for search and custody.
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
