Back
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MINU POULINE D/O ANTONY KAMMANS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Petitioners are accused Nos. 4 and 5 in C.C. No. 17/2023 on the files of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (Economic Offences), Ernakulam, which arise out of Crime No. 1499/2021 of Ernakulam Town South Police Station. Petitioners seek to quash the aforesaid proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
2. Petitioners are alleged to have committed offences under Sections 27(a) and 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’). Prosecution alleged that, on 06.09.2020, the accused had consumed a narcotic drug and video graphed the said act, thereby committing the offences alleged.
3. I have heard Sri. Justus, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Noushad K.A. the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The edifice of the prosecution in the instant case is built upon a video-graph recovered during the search of an apartment. Even if the allegations in the final report are assumed to be true, a question arises whether an offence under the NDPS Act can be said to have been committed by the accused.
5. It is the admitted case that the contraband allegedly consumed by the petitioners was not recovered during the search. The allegati
The absence of contraband recovery is critical for establishing guilt under the NDPS Act, and video evidence alone is insufficient for prosecution.
Confessions made to police officers are inadmissible as evidence, and circumstantial evidence alone is insufficient for prosecution under narcotics law.
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
