Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Veerendran – Appellant
Versus
State Rep. By the Inspector Of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background details of the case and charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. prosecution's overview and defense arguments. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court analysis of evidence presented. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. examination of prosecution's inconsistencies. (Para 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. defense claims of illegal custody and evidence evaluation. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. procedural failures and implications on conviction. (Para 36 , 38 , 39) |
| 7. final ruling on acquittal and order. (Para 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
Since the appellants in all the three appeals were arrayed as accused in the same crime number, these appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposed by way of this common judgment.
3.According to the prosecution, P.W.3 received secret information on 26.06.2021 at about 7.45 p.m. regarding the illegal possession and transportation of a large quantity of ganja in a Hyundai Creta car bearing Registration No. TN-58-BW-0155 and a Splendor motorcycle bearing Registration No. TN-58-AF-0322, near Veeramudian Koil, opposite Kanmaykarai Road, Muthukpetai, Madurai. P.W.3 reduced the information into writing, made the corresponding entry in the Gene
The prosecution's failure to prove presence and possession of contraband due to inconsistencies and non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the NDPS Act led to acquittal.
Strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 42(1) and 42(2) of the NDPS Act is required, and the prosecution must establish the accused's conscious possession of the contraband.
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 conviction and sentence for illegal possession of narcotics were upheld as the prosecution demonstrated compliance with legal procedures and sufficient evidence of possession.
The court affirmed that possession of 201 kilograms of ganja established under the NDPS Act sufficed for conviction, confirming that procedural safeguards were adhered to despite the absence of indep....
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
