Back
IN HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SANJEEV KUMAR, MOHD YOUSUF WANI
Union Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir Through Station House Officer – Appellant
Versus
Farman Ali S/o Bari Din – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mohd Yousuf Wani, J.
1. Delay condoned and leave to file appeal granted vide Order dated 11th October, 2022.
2. Impugned in the instant appeal filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is the judgment of acquittal dated 8th October, 20015, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kathua, [hereinafter referred to as the “trial court” for short] while culminating trial on a criminal case bearing FIR No. 413/2013 of P/S Kathua, and titled as State vs. Farman Ali and Anr bearing File No. 31/Session instituted on 4th January, 2014.
3. The impugned judgment has been assailed by the appellant-Union Territory of J&K on the main grounds that case FIR No. 413/2013 came to be registered with the Police Station, Kathua, pursuant to the recovery of 10,000 capsules of SPM-PRX from the respondents/accused [6000 capsules from R-1 and 4000 capsules from R-2] on 5th November, 2013 at 5:30 P.M., when they came to be apprehended by a Police Patrolling Party of Police Post Industrial Estate, Kathua, who failed to account for the possession of the same. That the seizure and sampling of the recovered contraband substance was done as per the procedure and the statements of
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to adhere to mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act undermines the case.
The prosecution's failure to adhere to mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act led to serious discrepancies, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
The court affirmed that possession of contraband substances establishes statutory presumptions requiring defendants to prove lack of conscious possession under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Sub....
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 prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, especially under the NDPS Act, where strict compliance with procedural safeguards is essential.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of strict compliance with the procedural provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A(2), (3) and (4), for seizure and s....
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of 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
