Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI
Robin Phukan, J
Goljar Uddin Ahmed @ Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background facts leading to the appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. appellants' arguments against the trial court's decision. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence and procedural compliance. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 31 , 32) |
| 4. key legal principles established by the court. (Para 11 , 28 , 30) |
| 5. court's conclusion and order of acquittal. (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the appellants and also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.
2. Judgment and order dated 03.01.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (Addl.), Dhubri, (hereinafter „Trial Court‟ for short) in Special Case No.394/2022 is impugned in this appeal, under Section 374 read with Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 36B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS), Act, 1985.
3. The background facts, leading to filing of the present criminal appeal, are briefly stated as under:-
“On 12.07.2022, at about 10:30 p.m., acting on a tip off, S.I. Chandan Rout, I/c of Bazar T.O
The prosecution's failure to produce seized contraband and corroborate police testimony undermines the case, leading to acquittal on benefit of doubt.
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.
(1) Section 52A of NDPS Act is a mandatory rule of evidence – When there is non-compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act, where a certification of a Magistrate is lacking any inventory, photograph or li....
Non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A, undermines the prosecution's case and warrants 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.
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.
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....
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
Section 52A of NDPS Act deals with disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
Compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act, notably Section 52A, is essential to validate convictions; failure to produce seized contraband is fatal to the prosecution's case.
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
