Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Nirmal Kumar
Mohideen – Appellant
Versus
State by Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant convicted of ndps act violations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against procedural non-compliance. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. procedural rights under sections 42, 50, and 52-a violated. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. evidence and statutory requirements not satisfied. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. conviction set aside, appellant acquitted. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
M. Nirmal Kumar, J.
The appellant was charged for offence under Sections 8 (c) r/w 22(c) and 8(c) r/w 28 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (In short 'The Act') in C.C.No.124 of 2018. On conclusion of trial, the learned I Additional Special Judge, Court of the Special Judge, I Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under NDPS Act, Chennai acquitted from the charge under Section 8 (c) r/w 28 of the Act but convicted the appellant for offence under Section 8 (c) r/w 22(c) of the Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months vide judgment, dated 26.08.2022. Challenging the judgment of conviction, present criminal appeal is filed.
2. The case of the prosecution is
Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act require strict compliance, and failure to inform the accused of their rights and improper procedural conduct invalidates charges.
Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985 is conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.
Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, admissibility of accused statements, and applicability of Section 50 of the 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 mandatory requirements under Section 50 of the NDPS Act must be strictly followed to ensure an individual's rights during searches; failure to comply renders any recovery and subsequent convictio....
Strict compliance with the NDPS Act's procedural requirements is mandatory; failure to do so vitiates the trial and leads to acquittal.
Strict compliance with the provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, particularly in informing the accused of their right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, is mandatory and non-....
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
