Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Jagjit Singh @ Kala – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the verdict made on 19.08.2005, upon Sessions Case No. 32 of 2004, by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa, where-through he convicted the accused for a charge drawn qua an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of 22.08.2005, he proceeded to impose upon the convict sentence of rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of 15 years, besides imposed upon him, sentence of fine of Rs.1,00,000/- besides in default of payment of fine amount, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of five years.
2. The accused-convict became aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, and, also the consequent therewith sentences (supra), as became imposed. Resultantly, he instituted there-against the instant appeal bearing No. CRA-D-862-DB-2005.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The genesis of the prosecution case are that, on 16.10.2003, ASI Jagdish Rai while posted as such at CIA staff, Sirsa, was present near Old Truck Union, Sirsa, in connection with patroll
The court emphasized the necessity of obtaining a search warrant under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, reinforcing the importance of statutory compliance in criminal proceedings.
The prosecution must maintain an unbroken chain of custody for evidence; failure to do so can result in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish a clear and unbroken chain of custody and evidence handling to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
The necessity of complying with statutory requirements for personal search, preservation of case property, and the production of untampered case property in court as primary evidence to prove the cha....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with statutory provisions, the veracity of evidence, and the benefit of doubt in criminal cases.
The High Court affirmed that, in chance recovery cases, compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act is not mandatory, reinforcing the credibility of police testimony despite the absence of independent....
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
