Back
SANJAY DHAR, RAJESH SEKHRI
State of J. &K. – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajesh Sekhri, J.) :
1. This appeal has been directed against judgment dated 05.03.2011, propounded by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereinafter referred to as "trial court") in File No. 12/Sessions titled "State of J&K v. Ashok Kumar and Anr.", vide FIR No. 177/ 2000 of Police Station Bahu Fort, Jammu for offences under sections 21/29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ("NDPS Act" for short), vide which, respondent has been acquitted.
2. The case set up by the prosecution in brief, is that on 05.06.2000 at about 7 P.M, a joint Naka of Police Station, Bahu Fort led by S.P., and NCB was laid at Panama Chowk. A Scooter, without registration number, on its way from Vikram Chowk to Railway Station was intercepted. While two pillion riders were apprehended by the Naka party, driver of the Scooter succeeded to give a slip to the Naka party and fled away. Accused apprehended on spot were found carrying a black colour bag. As the said bag was giving smell of some substance, a notice was given to the accused for exercise of option to be searched in presence of Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. Since they opted to be searched in the presence of Ma
Strict compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act is essential; failure to do so invalidates the prosecution's case and may lead to acquittal.
The prosecution's failure to adhere to mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act led to serious discrepancies, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and contradictions in evidence undermine the prosecution's case, leading to the reversal of conviction.
Proper investigation and compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act are crucial in cases involving severe punishment and societal impact.
Prosecution must comply with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act; failure to establish safe custody and proper procedures leads 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.
NDPS Act – Search and seizer of contraband – Conviction set aside - prosecution has not complied with the provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act as the information alleged to have been received regardi....
The conviction was quashed due to failure to comply with mandatory procedures for evidence collection under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the importance of a fair trial.
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
