Back
BIRENDRA KUMAR
Premchand, S/o. Kashiram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Birendra Kumar, J.)
1. Appellants Premchand and Trilokchand faced trial in Sessions Case No. 30/2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Raisinghnagar, District Anoopgarh (Sri Ganganagar). On 07.02.2024, judgment of conviction was passed against appellant No.1 Premchand for offence under Section 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and against appellant No.2 Trilokchand for offence under Section 8/29 of the said Act. The learned trial Judge sentenced both the appellants with 14 years’ rigorous imprisonment plus fine of Rs.1,50,000 and in default of payment of fine, 3 years’ rigorous imprisonment has been ordered.
2. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 26.03.2020 at about 12:50 pm, PW-2 Nahar Singh, SHO of Sri Vijaynagar, District Ganga Nagar alongwith other constables was on patrolling duty in view of the Covid lock down. At around 7.30 pm, the police personnel reached Bilochia Village, where they saw a person exiting from a shop, carrying a white plastic bag. On seeing the police, the person started fleeing away, however, he was caught by the police. The person caught by the police was Premchand; appellant No. 1 herein
The court ruled that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act invalidates the evidence, leading to the overturning of the conviction.
The judgment establishes that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act is a critical flaw that can invalidate a narcotics conviction.
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, and failure to adhere to this provision can lead to the dismissal of charges.
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 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.
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
