BIRENDRA KUMAR
Pappu Lal @ Dinesh Kumar S/o Shankar Lal Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Birendra Kumar, J.
1. Appellant-Suresh Kumar has challenged his conviction by the judgment dated 13.4.2023 (on the date of judgment appellant Pappulal was absconding in the same case) for the offence under Sections 8/21 and 8/25 of NDPS Act in Sessions Case No.62/2014 (60/2010). Appellant Pappu Lal @ Dinesh Kumar has challenged his conviction for the offence under Section 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 by the impugned judgment dated 11.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases no. 2, Chittorgarh Camp Nimbahera, district Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No.62/2014 (60/2010).
The learned trial Judge has sentenced both the appellants with 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment plus fine of Rs.1 Lac and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 06 months’ rigorous imprisonment.
2. Prosecution case as disclosed in the FIR is that on 07.07.2009 at about 5.55 pm informant-Madanlal (PW-11) got information from Police Informer that two persons (the appellants) sitting on a motorcycle near Linkoda were about to cross from Choti Sadri side and Brown Sugar is kept on the right side of motorcycle (where battery is usually placed). The information w
The conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A, undermining the prosecution's case.
The conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A regarding the presence of a Magistrate during sampling.
The judgment establishes that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is a critical flaw that can invalidate a narcotics conviction.
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in narcotics cases, and failure to adhere to this provision can lead to the dismissal of charges.
The court ruled that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act invalidates the conviction, emphasizing the necessity of a Magistrate's presence during evidence collection.
The court ruled that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act invalidates the evidence, leading to the overturning of the conviction.
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in narcotics cases.
The conviction was overturned due to failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A regarding sample collection.
The conviction under the NDPS Act was quashed due to failure to comply with mandatory procedures for sample collection, emphasizing the importance of due process in narcotics cases.
The conviction was quashed due to failure to comply with mandatory procedures for evidence collection under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.