Back
K. MURALI SHANKAR
Mahmood Zaffrany – Appellant
Versus
State by The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Madurai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer:This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. r/w 36-B of NDPS Act 1985, to call for records and set aside the conviction of the appellant in C.C.No.44 of 2013 dated 09.03.2018 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai by allowing this appeal.
1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/second accused in C.C.No.44 of 2013 dated 09.03.2018 on the file of the Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.03.2013 on receipt of the reliable information, as per the instructions of the Superintendent, NCB, Trivandrum (Camp at Madurai), the Intelligence Officer Syed Sharique Omar constituted a team of officers of NCB Madurai and proceeded to the place at about 17.00 hours, that after reaching Sirukoodalpatti Bus Stop, they had arranged two persons to stand as witnesses and have proceeded to the house bearing No.4/75C, New No.791, Vairavapuram, Sirukoodalpatti, that the accused Veeramani @ Siva, on seeing the police party, tried to flee from that spot, that
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's consideration of evidence, compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, and the proportionality of the sentence imposed, leadi....
Compliance with mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act, sufficiency of evidence, and re-appreciation of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The evidentiary value of oral testimony and circumstantial evidence in establishing guilt under the NDPS Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of evidence, compliance with legal procedures, and the relevance of the appellant's confession statement and plea for leniency in....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove conscious possession of contraband and the application of presumption of culpable mental state unde....
Acquittal of the accused under the NDPS Act is upheld as the trial court's judgment was not flawed and adhered to evidentiary standards.
The court held that the Intelligence Officer was authorized to file a complaint under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. It also held that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 and Section 57 were complied....
The requirement of legal evidence beyond reasonable doubt for conviction and the benefit of doubt in case of doubts raised by the prosecution's case.
The prosecution must prove recovery and confirmation of contraband substances beyond reasonable doubt, and the sustainability of conviction without the defendant's confessional statement.
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
