Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, JJ
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sushil Kukreja, J.)
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of Criminal Procedure Code against judgment dated 10.04.2015, passed by learned Special Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 02/2011, whereby the accused (respondent herein) was acquitted from the charges under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act (for short “the NDPS Act”).
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, can be summarized as under:
2(a). On 08.05.2010 a police team was patrolling at Mehar- Dhar and also checking the vehicles. Around 08:30 p.m., a maruti car, having registration No. CHF-4499, came from Joginder Nagar side and it was stopped. Accused Rakesh Singh was sitting on rear seat and he tried to flee, but he was nabbed. The accused was baffled and he was hiding something under his T-shirt. On being directed to show as to what he was hiding, charas in the shape of sticks was recovered from him. The recovered contraband, on being weighed, was found to be 150 grams. Thereafter, the police completed all the codal formalities, viz., recovered contraband was taken into possession, sp
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's view is unreasonable; failure to comply with mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act renders evidence inadmissible....
Strict compliance with the provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, particularly in informing the accused of their right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, is mandatory and non-....
(1) Appeal against acquittal – If two reasonable views are possible on the basis of evidence on record, Appellate Court should not disturb finding of acquittal recorded by trial Court.(2) Seizure of ....
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 42(2) and 50 of the NDPS Act vitiates the search and recovery, leading to acquittal.
The court upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused due to significant procedural violations and lack of evidence connecting them to the alleged drug possession.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless compelling reasons exist to overturn an acquittal.
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
