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

2022 Supreme(J&K) 750

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
RAJNESH OSWAL, PUNEET GUPTA, JJ.
State of J&K – Petitioner
Versus
Shakoor Ahmed and Another – Respondents
CRAA No. 57 of 2014
Decided On : 30-12-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: R.S. Jamwal.
For the Respondents: P.N. Raina, Nigam P. Saroop.

IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must establish a clear chain of custody and provide consistent evidence to support charges under the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act; otherwise, the accused may be acquitted.

Headnote:

NARCOTICS - ACQUITTAL OF ACCUSED - Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 15, 20, 54 - The court discussed the provisions of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, particularly sections 8, 15, and 20, which outline the offenses related to the possession and trafficking of narcotics. Section 54 creates a presumption against the accused regarding possession. The court emphasized the importance of proper evidence handling and the need for the prosecution to establish a clear chain of custody for the seized contraband. The lack of credible evidence and material contradictions in witness testimonies led to the conclusion that the trial court's acquittal was justified.

Fact of the Case:

The appeal arises from the acquittal of Shakoor Ahmed and Mohd. Farooq, who were charged under the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act for possession of charas and poppy straw. The contraband was allegedly recovered from their vehicle during a police search, but the trial court found significant inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the trial court had correctly assessed the evidence, noting contradictions in witness statements and a lack of proper chain of custody for the seized contraband. The prosecution failed to establish a credible case against the accused, leading to the conclusion that the acquittal was warranted.

Issues: Whether the trial court erred in acquitting the accused based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly regarding the recovery and handling of the contraband.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the trial court's decision, emphasizing that the prosecution must provide clear and consistent evidence to support charges under the Narcotics Act. The presence of material contradictions and the absence of a proper chain of custody for the seized items were critical in determining the outcome.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal of the accused was upheld.

JUDGMENT :

RAJNESH OSWAL, J.

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal dated 08.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajouri (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) in file No. 42/Special, titled, State vs. Shakoor Ahmed and Another whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charges for commission of offences under sections 8/15/20 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act) in FIR No. 40/2011 of Police Station, Rajouri.

2. The judgment has been impugned on the ground that the learned trial court has not appreciated the evidence in its correct perspective and the learned trial court has not considered that section 54 of the Act creates a statutory presumption against the accused and if the accused fails to account satisfactorily the possession of the narcotics drugs and psychotropic substance, then he is required to be convicted.

3. Mr. R.S. Jamwal, learned AAG appearing for the appellant vehemently argued that all the witnesses examined by the prosecution have proved that the contraband was recovered from the respondents but the learned trial court has not appreciated the said evidence in its right perspective and acquitted the respondents erroneously.

4. On the contrary, Mr. P.N. Raina, learned senior counsel representing respondents vehemently argued that there is delay of more than a month in sending the samples to the FSL for chemical analysis and there is no evidence as to the safe custody of the samples allegedly extracted from the recovered contraband till the same were dispatched to FSL. He further argued that there are material contradictions in the prosecution evidence and learned trial court has rightly acquitted the respondents.

5. Heard and perused the record.

6. The case set up by the prosecution is that on 31.01.2011 at around 11.30 AM a docket was produced by Constable Ghulam Rasool in the Police Station, Rajouri, that was sent by Sub Inspector, Jan Mohd. It was stated in the docket that S.I Jaan Mohd. alongwith other Police Officials i.e. Constable Shafiq Ahmed, Imtiaz Ahmed, Ghulam Rasool and Yashpaul were performing naka duty at Sallani Pul, Rajouri and at around 10.30 AM, a Santro car bearing registration No. 7722/JK03 coming from Jammu side, was stopped for checking. Two persons were found to be travelling in the same. On enquiry, driver disclosed his name as Shakoor Ahmed-respondent No. 1 herein and the other person disclosed his name as Mohd. Farooq-respondent No. 2 herein. Both the persons appeared to be in nervous condition. The whiff of charas from the vehicle was felt by Sub Inspector, Jan Mohd., who became suspicious that some narcotics may be in the vehicle, as such, he informed his senior officers about it and requested them for the search of the vehicle to be conducted in the presence of the Magistrate. In the meanwhile, Dy.SP, Headquarter Rajouri and Tehsildar Rajouri came on spot. Option was obtained from both the accused persons and vehicle was checked in presence of Magistrate. Assistance of Ravi Kumar, Mechanic was also sought. During the search, sealing of the right and left side of the dickey was opened and charas weighing 6 kgs wrapped in maize cobs and poppy straw weighing 400 grams were recovered. The samples of the contraband were prepared for sending the same to the FSL for chemical analysis. The accused were arrested. The vehicle was also seized. On receipt of this docket, FIR bearing No. 40/2011 dated 31.01.2011 was registered against the accused persons for commission of offences under sections 8, 15 and 20 of the Act. The investigation of the case was conducted by Inspector Deepak Jasrotia. He came on spot and prepared the site plan and also seized the documents prepared by the Sub Inspector Jan Mohd. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid before the learned Sessions Judge, Rajouri on 28.04.2011. The same was transferred to the trial

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 Back to top