Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
PRANJAL DAS
Ashraful Islam, S/o Asmot Ali – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural context for suspension of sentence application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defense arguments regarding evidentiary inconsistencies. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. prosecution reliance on ndps act section 37 embargo. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. judicial assessment of evidence and trial reliability. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. application of section 37 as a statutory bar. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
PRANJAL DAS, J.
Heard Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP for the State.
2. Invoking the provisions of Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023, the applicant/convict–appellant seeks suspension of sentence and grant of bail in connection with the Judgment and Order dated 27.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, Dhubri (Additional Sessions Judge) in Special NDPS Case No. 333 of 2023, whereby the applicant/appellant was convicted under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant has taken this Court through the depositions of the prosecution witness
Point of Law : Statement under Section 67 cannot be relied upon but herein, Court are not considering to rely upon statement under Section 67 of NDPS Act, thus judgment is also not applicable in this....
Doubts in the prosecution's case regarding the seizure of contraband justified the suspension of the appellant's sentence.
The court affirmed that minor contradictions in prosecution testimony do not undermine a conviction under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the reliability of police witness statements.
Compliance with statutory procedures during search and seizure is essential for maintaining the integrity of evidence in drug-related offenses.
The court established that procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial, and failure to adhere to such provisions can lead to the grant of bail even in serious cases.
Compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of seizure and evidence, impacting the court's decision on bail and sentence suspension.
The court emphasized procedural discrepancies in evidence handling and the necessity for independent corroboration in drug-related cases, leading to bail grant.
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
