Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Dharmender Kumar @ Govinda – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. police recovery of 5.5g heroin from pocket. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial convicted accused despite one hostile witness. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments center on section 50 ndps compliance. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. section 50 applies to body clothing searches. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. officer must inform right to magistrate/gazetted search. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. third option of police search improperly offered. (Para 17 , 18 , 23) |
| 7. third option vitiates section 50 compliance. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. pre-search memo mentioning sections creates doubt. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. contradictions and hostile witness undermine case. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. section 50 violation warrants accused acquittal. (Para 33 , 34 , 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.06.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, Nurpur, District Kangra (learned Trial Court), vide which the appellant (accused before the learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance (ND&PS) Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous im
Offering third option of police search under Section 50 NDPS Act, alongside Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, vitiates recovery from clothing; combined with procedural doubts and contradictions, mandat....
Non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act during the search invalidates the recovery of contraband, leading to acquittal.
Offering third option of police search under Section 50 NDPS Act, alongside Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, vitiates recovery; strict compliance mandatory, non-compliance plus discrepancies entitle a....
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 emphasized strict compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, holding that failure to inform the accused of his right to a personal search before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate invalidate....
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-....
Non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act vitiates the search and recovery process, reinforcing the presumption of innocence in acquittal cases.
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
