HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
Irfan S/o Sh. Taaj Mohd – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
Order :
1. By way of filing this instant Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.12.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh in Criminal Case No. 11/2023, whereby the learned Judge has rejected the application filed by the petitioner.
2. The gist of the present case is that the petitioner has been arraigned as an accused and arrested in a case under the NDPS Act for the offence under sections 8/22, 25 for having possession of 400 grams MDMA wherein trial had commenced before the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh (for short, “the trial Court”). After seizure the samples were taken from the recovered contraband and sent to the FSL. During the pendency of the trial, the petitioner had moved applications on 28.04.2023 and 27.07.2023, seeking direction for taking sample from the original article lying in maalkhana for forensic examination to bring the true facts on record. However, the learned trial Court, vide order dated 11.12.2023, rejected the said applications and declined to take sample from the remainder article for the purpose of sending the same for forensic analysis. Aggrieved thereby, t
The court affirmed the right to a fair trial, emphasizing the necessity of judicial oversight in forensic examinations to ensure the integrity of evidence in narcotics cases.
Failure to comply with mandatory sampling procedures under Section 52A of the NDPS Act invalidates the prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
(1) Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances – Even in cases where there is non-compliance with procedural requirements of Section 52A, it does not necessarily vitiate trial or w....
(1) Section 52A of NDPS Act is a mandatory rule of evidence – When there is non-compliance of Section 52A of NDPS Act, where a certification of a Magistrate is lacking any inventory, photograph or li....
Recovery of contraband – Penal provisions of NDPS Act, 1985 prescribes very harsh punishment for offender and it is incumbent for prosecution side that mandatory procedural requirement to be followed....
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.
Non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A, undermines the prosecution's case and warrants acquittal.
The conviction was set aside due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A, undermining the prosecution's case.
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.