BIRENDRA KUMAR
Raja Ram S/o Shri Bhairu Lal Meghwal – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Narcotics – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The appellants and one Govind Ram (since acquitted) faced trial in Sessions Case No. 02/2019 (06/2017). On 09.03.2022 judgment of conviction was passed against appellants Raja Ram, Karu Das and Dashrath Singh. Appellants Raja Ram and Karu Das were convicted for offences under sections 8/18 (b) & 8/29 NDPS Act and appellants Dashrath Singh was convicted for offences under sections 8/25 & 8/29 NDPS Act. The learned trial Judge has sentenced the appellants with 15 years’ rigorous imprisonment plus fine of Rs. 2 Lacs and in default of payment of fine, 1 year rigorous imprisonment has been ordered.
2. In brief, the prosecution case is that Sudhir Yadav (PW-4), Superintendent of Police and Banwarilal Meena (PW-2), Sub-Inspector received secret information that on 21.07.2016 between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., appellant no. 3 was going to send appellant Nos. 1 and 2 to Ajmer via Chittorgarh route in his Maruti Swift Dzire car, bearing registration No. RJ 09 CA 9704, to deliver about 10 - 20 kg opium (Afeem) to a smuggler. Thereafter, a preventive team was formed on 21.7.2016 itself. At around 8.30 am, the preventive team got stationed in front of a filling station at Chittorgarh
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 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.
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in narcotics cases.
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, and failure to adhere to this provision can lead to the dismissal of charges.
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 judgment establishes that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is a critical flaw that can invalidate a narcotics conviction.
Compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is mandatory for the admissibility of evidence in drug-related cases, and failure to adhere to this provision can lead to the dismissal of the prosecution'....
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in drug cases, and its violation can lead to the dismissal of charges.
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.