Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, ROMESH VERMA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Basant Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution alleges 2.5kg charas recovery from accused's rucksack in vehicle. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. appellate interference in acquittal limited unless perverse or impossible view. (Para 7 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 3. official witnesses testify to recovery, sealing, dispatch with noted inconsistencies. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. contradictions in police testimonies on vehicle, spot, photos undermine credibility. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 5. section 42 ndps violation; no independent witnesses or possession proof fatal. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 6. acquittal upheld for prosecution failure to prove guilt beyond doubt. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
JUDGMENT :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present appeal arises out of judgment of acquittal, as passed by the learned Special Judge-III, Mandi, dated 27.3.2015, whereby the accused/respondent has been acquitted in case FIR No. 161/2009, dated 21.12.2009, registered at Police Station Aut, District Mandi under Sections 20, 29, 61 and 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the Act).
2. The facts, as
Appeal against acquittal under NDPS Act dismissed; trial court's view upheld as not perverse due to witness contradictions, procedural lapses like unrecorded prior information, no independent witness....
Appellate interference in acquittal limited to perverse findings or sole guilt view; upheld where contradictions, non-examination of independent witnesses, and custody lapses render prosecution case ....
Appeal against NDPS acquittal dismissed upholding trial court due to contradictions in official testimonies, document/FIR anomalies, weight discrepancies creating reasonable doubt; appellate interfer....
Acquittal under NDPS Act upheld in appeal due to Section 50 non-compliance (invalid third option, improper waiver), witness inconsistencies, lack of independent witnesses on busy highway, and plausib....
Appeal against acquittal under NDPS Act: Interference only if trial court's view perverse or impossible; here, witness inconsistencies, procedural lapses justify upholding acquittal.
Appeal against acquittal under NDPS Act dismissed due to prosecution lapses including no independent witnesses, material contradictions in evidence, sample weight variations, and chain of custody gap....
Appeal against acquittal in NDPS case dismissed as trial court view not perverse; independent witnesses resiling from driver identification and lack of possession link creates reasonable doubt justif....
Acquittal under NDPS Section 20 upheld in appeal; no interference absent perversity where independent witnesses turn hostile denying recovery and contradictions undermine prosecution evidence.
Appeal against acquittal – No interference is required with appeal against acquittal merely because some other view is possible.
An appellate court reviewing an acquittal must respect the presumption of innocence unless the judgment is perverse or misreads evidence, supporting the lower court's decision.
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
