BIRENDRA KUMAR
Ladu Lal Jat S/o Magna Jat – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The sole appellant – Ladu Lal Jat faced trial in Sessions Case No.12/2019 and by the impugned judgment dated 30.06.2022 was found guilty for offence under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and by order of the same date was awarded rigorous imprisonment of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, six months rigorous imprisonment was ordered.
2. The aforesaid trial arose out of FIR No.202/2018 registered with Bigod Police Station at the behest of PW-3 – Ram Gopal Choudhary, who was in-charge Station House Officer of Bigod Police Station. According to FIR, on 26.09.2018, PW-3 along with his police team was engaged in checking of the vehicles. At about 6:55 pm, a Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No.RJ-14-UA-9651 was intercepted and from that vehicle twelve, bags of Afeem (doda chura) was seized. Total weight of the seized contraband was 212 Kg. and 650 Grms. The appellant was driving the said vehicle and was arrested at the spot. Out of seized contraband, 300 Grms. were taken out from each of the bags and two samples were sent for forensic examination and the rest were sealed as controlled samples. The remaining contraband were sealed in
Bothilal Vs. Intelligence Officer Narcotics Control Bureau reported in AIR Online 2023 SC 339
Mangilal Vs. The State of Madhya pradesh reported in 2023 INSC 634
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act vitiates the prosecution case, requiring the presence of a Magistrate during the seizure process.
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'....
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act, which mandates the presence of a Magistrate during the sampling of seized narcotics, renders the prosecution's case invalid.
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 creates reasonable doubt.
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.
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.
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 conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A, undermining the prosecution's case.
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
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.
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.