SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(P&H) 203

M.M.PUNCHHI
Fauji Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

1. This is a petition for bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on a disclosure statement on 15-4-1986 under S. 27 of the Evidence Act, he led the police party to a place of concealment and got recovered a substance weighing two Kgs. allegedly opium. The petitioner was arrested there and then. It now transpires that the Chemical Examiner has opined that the sample extracted therefrom was opium. Statedly, ehallan has been put in by the prosecution in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kaithal.

3. The enactment and application of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) with effect from 14-11-1985 has completely altered the traditional course adopted in such like cases. S. 18 of the NDPS Act, whereunder possession of opium is punishable, prescribes punishment of rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to twenty years and the offender shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees. The Court, for reasons to be recorded in the judgment, may even impose a fine exceeding two lakh


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top