Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Yashar Rahuman – Appellant
Versus
State, represented by The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID, Chennai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedures for seizure and arrest under the ndps act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding procedural transparency and evidence reliability. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. analysis of section 52-a ndps compliance and evidentiary integrity. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. acquittal based on reasonable doubt from procedural lapses. (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
1.This criminal appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated18.12.2023 of the I Additional Subordinate Court, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under the NDPS Act, Chennai in C.C.No.153 of 2019 finding the appellant/accused guilty for the offences and sentencing him as under:
2. Shorn of unnecessary facts, the relevant facts leading to the institution of this criminal appeal are stated as under:
2.1 On 28.03.2019, Rajagopalan (PW1), Sub-Inspector of Police, NIB-CID, Chennai, received information from an informant that MDMA tablet and heroin are being trafficked by the appellant near Apple Palace, Mannadi Street, Chennai and the appellant was likely to sell the same. Rajagopalan (PW1) recorded the said information under Ex.P1 and submitted the same to Amala Rathinam (
Non-compliance with the mandatory sampling and inventory procedures for seized contraband creates a rebuttable presumption of tampering. Once foundational facts of such lapses are proven, the prosecu....
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
The court established that procedural lapses in the handling of seized narcotics do not necessarily invalidate a conviction if the evidence of possession is compelling and no prejudice to the accused....
The prosecution established the appellant's conscious possession of narcotics, validating the conviction despite procedural non-compliance, as substantial evidence supported the case.
The prosecution must prove possession of narcotics beyond reasonable doubt, and procedural lapses do not automatically invalidate a conviction if credible evidence supports the case.
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
