SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(HP) 52

V.P.BHATNAGAR, R.S.THAKUR
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
SUDARSHAN KUMAR – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

V. P. Bhatnagar, J. :- The determination of these cases requires close scrutiny of the various provisions, particularly those relating to procedure contained in Chapter V of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'Narcotic Act').

2. Here, brief reference may be made at the very outset to the facts of Cr. Rev. No. 106 of 1987 and Cr. Rev. No. 121 of 1987.

3. The first Criminal Revision No. 106 of 1987 is directed against the order dated August 11, 1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, whereby he declined to frame a chargesheet against the accused on the facts placed before him. Briefly stated, the prosecution case was that S.H.O., Babu Ram received a secret information on December 1, 1985 that accused Sudarshan Kumar was carrying on sale of opium at his house and that opium in large quantity could be recovered from his house. On the following morning, he associated three independent witnesses with the raiding party and went to the Sudershan Kumar's house. He gave his personal search before searching the house. During the search he found a plastic bag hidden underneath a gunny bag. The plastic bag contained opium weighing 352 gms. The cas































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top