IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
SURESHWAR THAKUR, SUDEEPTI SHARMA, JJ.
Deepak Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRA-S No. 5190-SB of 2015
Decided On : 18-09-2024
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Since all the criminal appeals/petition involve a substantial question of law relating to whether the whole case property is to be sent or whether a sample is to be sent from each vial or strip of tablets to the FSL for chemical examination, as such, the said common question of law is amenable to be decided through a common verdict.
2. The lead appeal in the bunch of 13 appeal(s)/petition is CRA-S 5190-SB-2015. The relief as claimed in the appeals (supra) is extracted hereinafter.
3. However, before proceeding to determine the validity of the espousal (supra), as raised in the lead criminal appeal (supra), it is deemed imperative to refer to the order of reference made on 02.08.2017, wherebys the Single Bench of this Court after formulating the hereinafter extracted question of law, ordered that the said question of law be decided by a Larger Bench of this Court.
In the present cases the recovery is of manufactured drug i.e. Rexcof or Phinotil etc. In my view, there is no need to send all the incriminating bottles or tablets to the FSL for examination or to take sample from each vial or strip of tablets. Even in the case of loose tablets, in my view, sample can be drawn by making it homogenous and can be sent to the FSL. If the whole case property is to be sent then there is no purpose for separating of sample from the case property. Even otherwise, the case property is generally produced before the Court or if it is not destroyed during the pendency of the trial, the Court has power to summon the case property to see batch number etc. The case property is also produced before the Court under Section 52-A of the NDPS Act and the Court also draw the representative sample. Therefore, in these circumstances, I find that as a substantial question of law arises whether the whole case property is to be sent or whether sample is to be sent from each vial or strip of tablets to the FSL for chemical examination. As this finding will affect a large number of cases pertaining to the States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh, therefore, the matter is referred for decision by the Larger Bench.
The Registry is directed to put up these cases before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for constitution of Larger Bench.”
4. Consequently, under the orders of the Hon’ble Chief Justice, the instant Larger Bench has been constituted.
5. All the counsels appearing today before this Court have been heard at length.
6. Before proceeding to render an answer to the substantial question of law (supra), the making of allusion(s) to the standing order No.1/89, as drawn by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), is of utmost importance. In clause 2.3 and 2.4 thereof, clauses whereof becomes extracted hereinafter, it becomes elucidated that the quantity to be borne in each sample, thus for a chemical test becoming made thereons at the laboratory concerned, shall not be less than 5 grams in respect of all narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
Only representative samples of narcotic drugs need to be sent for testing, provided the entire bulk is homogeneously mixed, ensuring adherence to proper sampling procedures.
Failure to comply with mandatory sampling procedures under Section 52A of the NDPS Act invalidates the prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
The prosecution must maintain an unbroken chain of custody for evidence; failure to do so can result in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
Point of Law : Harsher the punishment, more is the strictness of proof required for the prosecution. The burden is always upon prosecution to prove the case against the person accused with proof beyo....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to adhere to mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act undermines the case.
Thee amount of contraband, recovered from the respondent, cannot be held more than that which was sent to Chemical Analyst and was affirmed by Forensic Science Laboratory as a contraband.
Appellate court upholds acquittal under NDPS Act if trial view possible; strict compliance with sampling procedures essential; witness contradictions, no independent corroboration fatal to prosecutio....
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act, requiring samples to be drawn and certified by a Magistrate, vitiates the trial as it fails to produce primary evidence.
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.