Back
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR
Farida Begum – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Present appeal has been preferred against judgment dated 1.4.2022, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge-II, Sirmaur at Nahan in CIS Case No. 158 of 2013, titled as State of H.P. Vs. Farida Begum, arising out of police challan under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) in FIR No. 227 of 2013, dated 25.6.2013, registered in Police Station, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Additional Advocate General and have also gone through the record.
3. Prosecution case in nutshell is that on 25.6.2013, seven Police officials of Special Investigating Unit (SIU), during lunch hours, proceeded from Nahan on patrolling. H.C. Hari Chand, constables Mukesh Kumar, Kailash Panwar, Vikramjeet and Rajinder were in private car of Hari Chand, whereas Amit and Rupinder were on Motor Cycle. They reached Vishwakarma Chowk at about 5:55 P.M. where H.C. Hari Chand received a secret information that one Farida Begum W/o Rashid R/o Village Sainwala, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P. was coming on Motor Cycle of her son from Vikasnagar s
Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act is essential, failing which evidence obtained may be deemed inadmissible, and acquittal may be warranted due to lack of credible evidence.
The court confirmed convictions under the NDPS Act, emphasizing strict standards of evidence and the presumption of guilt regarding drug possession, while minor discrepancies in testimonies were deem....
Section 50 of NDPS Act are reproduced as Conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.
Testimony of police officials can be sufficient for conviction in drug cases, even without independent witnesses, as long as found reliable and trustworthy.
An acquittal based on material contradictions in witness testimonies and unexplained discrepancies in the weight of recovered contraband between the scene and the forensic lab is sound, as the prosec....
The court reaffirmed that in narcotic cases, the prosecution bears a heavy burden of proof, and any reasonable doubt resulting from discrepancies leads to acquittal.
The absence of independent witnesses does not invalidate the prosecution's case if police testimonies are credible, and Section 50 of the NDPS Act is not applicable when recovery is from a bag.
Conviction can be based upon testimonies of official witnesses, if inspire confidence.
Point of Law : The purpose of Section 52-A is to provide a mechanism, whereby there is no misuse of the contraband recovered by the authorities and the same is kept in safe custody and/or destroyed w....
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
