IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SANJEEV KUMAR, RAJESH SEKHRI
State of Jammu & Kashmir – Appellant
Versus
Naresh Kumar S/o Duni Chand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
1. The State is in appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 19th October, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udhampur [“trial Court”] in File No.32 and 8/Special Challan titled State v. Naresh Kumar, whereby the trial Court has acquitted the respondent for commission of offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [“NDPS Act”].
2. The impugned judgment of acquittal is assailed by the appellant on multiple grounds. However, before we advert to the grounds of challenge, we deem it appropriate to narrate few material facts germane to the disposal of this appeal.
3. As the prosecution story goes, on 28.10.2004, PSI Bhopinder Singh along with other police personnel, who were on patrolling duty, saw the respondent moving in suspicious circumstances at Salathia Chowk, Udhampur. On seeing the police, respondent tried to run. He was chased and from out of his possession 380 gms of heroin was recovered. PSI Bhopinder Singh took out 110 gms of heroin out of the seized contraband as samples and sealed the same on spot. Rest 270 gms of heroin was separately packed. The sealed 110 gms of heroin was sent for
The prosecution must establish a reliable chain of custody for evidence; serious contradictions in evidence lead to acquittal.
Narcotic Substances - Acquittal Upheld - Appellant has failed to convince this court that during period from 23 to 27 sample was in safe custody - Provisions of NDPS Act are stringent and are require....
The limited scope of interference in judgment of acquittal and the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the failure to comply with legal provisions and present credible evidence can....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the court's discretion to uphold an acquittal when the eviden....
The prosecution must prove the recovery of contraband beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in witness statements can lead to acquittal.
The presumption of innocence strengthens an acquittal, requiring overwhelming evidence for a conviction; mere discrepancies in testimony may justify maintaining an acquittal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.