Back
BIRENDRA KUMAR
Ram Lal S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Birendra Kumar, J.
1. The sole appellant Ram Lal has challenged his conviction for the offence under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 by the impugned judgment dated 16.10.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No. 10/2022. The learned trial Judge has sentenced the appellant with 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment plus fine of Rs. 2 Lacs and in default of payment of fine, 2 years’ rigorous imprisonment has been ordered.
2. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 10.07.2021 at about 08:44 pm, PW-6 Devi Lal, in-charge of Chotisadri Police Station, Pratapgarh alongwith other constables was on patrolling duty. At around 09.05 pm, the police personnel reached Jeevanpura Fanta road, where they saw a Tractor of Mahindra Company coming towards the same road, however, they noticed that the sky-blue trolley attached to the tractor was without any number plate. The police personnel also noticed that another person was also sitting next to the driver of the tractor. On seeing the police, the driver of the tractor started running towards the field, leaving the tractor in the middle of the road. The police p
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 evidence, leading to the overturning of the conviction.
The conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A, undermining the prosecution's case.
Mandatory compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence in narcotics cases, particularly regarding the involvement of a Magistrate in the seizure process.
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 narcotics cases.
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
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
