IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit – Appellant
Versus
D. Maria Johnson @ Johnson – Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 421 of 2014
Decided On : 12-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the drug trafficking case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against trial court’s judgment of acquittal. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 10 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. supreme court precedents affecting ndps act compliance. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 19) |
| 4. court's analysis of evidentiary contradictions. (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 28) |
| 5. dismissal of appeal confirming acquittal. (Para 30) |
JUDGMENT :
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
1. The appellant, Narcotic Control Bureau has preferred this Criminal Appeal challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 25.10.2013 rendered by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Special Court for E.C Act Cases, Salem (Trial Court) in C.C. No.85 of 2005.
2. Gist of the case is as follows:
(i) The respondents 1 and 2 and absconding accused Pankaj Baijnath Bhargav @ Pankaj in conspiracy with one Fayaz of Sri Lanka indulged in drug trafficking between India and Sri Lanka by boat through Mannar Coast in Rameshwaran. The said Fayaz procured 12 kgs of heroin from the absconding accused Pankaj hailing from Mandsaur of State of Madhya Pradesh and arranged the respondents 1 and 2 to collect the drugs and smuggle the same to Sri Lanka by boat. As per their plan, on 15.08.2004, the respondents 1 and 2 left Chennai to Krishnagiri, stayed in Room No.207 of Geetha Lodge, Byrappa Street, Krishnagiri. They were informed that Pankaj, a tall man wearing specs and wheatish colour would deliver 12 kgs of heroin on 16.08.2004 between 10.00 hours and 12.00 hours.
(ii) PW1/Intelligence Officer received this information, informed his superior PW6/Superintendent giving details in Ex.P1. PW6 thereafter called NCB Officials namely PW1, PW2 & PW3 and directed them to take necessary action as discussed and proposed. Thereafter, PW1 along with NCB Team left Chennai in the official vehicle, reached Krishnagiri, made enquiry with V.Gnanamurthy/PW8 and R.Kubendran, Managers of Geetha Lodge, verified arrival register and requested both Managers of Geetha Lodge to be independent witnesses. On verification of the arrival register and enquiry, it was found that except Room No.207, other rooms occupied by regular guest and the Room No.207 booked in the name of one Tamilselvan and occupied by three persons. The NCB Team were keeping a watch. At about 11.00 hours, a person matching the description given by the Informant entered Geetha Lodge carrying a blue-grey colour rexin bag in his hand, enquired the staff of the lodge about Room No.207 and proceeded there, the NCB Team and independent witnesses followed him. After few minutes, the NCB Team knocked the door of Room No.207, the 1st respondent opened the door, at that time, three more persons inside the room including a person who carried blue- grey colour rexin bag. The NCB Team introduced themselves by showing identity card and enquired inmates of the room both in Tamil and Hindi. The person who carried blue-grey colour rexin bag was Pankaj Baijnath Bhargav @ Pankaj of Mandsaur, Madhya Pradesh and the other two persons are the 2nd respondent and one Senthilmurugan of Ramnad. Before conducting search, Section 50 of NDPS Act explained to them and also informed that one of the Member of the Team is a Gazetted Officer in the rank of Superintendent i.e., PW6 and they were given option to be searched before Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. The inmates in the Room No.207 declined and agreed to be searched in presence of PW6. When they enquired about the contraband, the respondents informed that they received 12 kgs of heroin from the absconding accused Pankaj and took out 10 packets from blue-grey colour rexin bag and handed over to PW1/Intelligence Officer. The packets cut opened using test kit, tested and found answering to heroin, thereafter, 10 packets weighed independently and found each packet were weighing between 1.070 kgs and 1.320 kgs. In total, all 10 packets weighed 12.840 kgs. Two samples from each packet taken, sealed, numbered, thereafter, the contraband tied and wax- sealed
Strict adherence to statutory provisions under the NDPS Act is essential for validity of evidence; non-compliance undermines the prosecution's case.
Mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act require strict compliance, and failure to inform the accused of their rights and improper procedural conduct invalidates charges.
Seizure of Heroin – Process of drawing of samples has to be in presence and under supervision of Magistrate and entire exercise has to be certified by him to be correct.
Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, admissibility of accused statements, and applicability of Section 50 of the Act.
The court affirmed that procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is essential, yet lapses may not void convictions if substantial evidence supports the prosecution's case.
The prosecution failed to prove the possession of narcotics and did not comply with mandatory statutory requirements, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Acquittal of the accused under the NDPS Act is upheld as the trial court's judgment was not flawed and adhered to evidentiary standards.
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.