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

2017 Supreme(All) 1863

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
DINESH KUMAR SINGH-I, JJ.
ANIL KUMAR DUBEY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
(Criminal Appeal No. 2835 of 1999, decided on 14th December, 2017)

Advocates:
Counsel :
N.D. Shukla for the Appellant; A.G.A. for the Respondent.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 21, 57—Contravention—Manufactured drugs—Report of arrest and seizure—Non-compliance of Section 57, NDPS Act—Not a word has been found to have been mentioned that any report was prepared under Section 57 by raiding party of arrest of accused and of having prepared any seizure memo, and of sending same to the superior authority within 48 hours—Not only that even if there was compliance made of Section 57 of NDPS Act, beyond 48 hours with justification of lapse of time, it could have been brought on record that said report was submitted—Section 57 of NDPS Act by itself is not mandatory—It contains certain procedural instructions for strict compliance by officers—If there is no strict compliance of any of these instructions that by itself cannot vitiate trial—But it would affect probative value of evidence regarding arrest or search and in some cases may invalidate arrest or search—It has to be shown that such non-compliance has caused prejudice and resulted in failure of justice—Officers cannot totally ignore these provisions—If there is no proper explanation for non-compliance or where officers totally ignore provisions then that will have adverse effect on prosecution’s case.

       (B) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Sections 21, 57—Contravention—Manufactured drugs—Report of arrest and seizure—Non-compliance of Section 57, NDPS Act—Illegal recovery of heroin—It was strict liability of prosecution to prove said recovery genuinely from accused—They ought to have prepared report under Section 57 of NDPS Act of arrest of accused and seizure of recovered contraband and should have sent it to superior authority within stipulated time or even beyond that with proper justification of delay which has not been done—Non-compliance of Section 57 of NDPS Act may not be single handedly enough to hold that accused was not guilty—But if non-compliance of Section 57, NDPS Act, is coupled with other significant infirmities, then certainly cumulative effect of all these infirmities would have adverse impact on prosecution’s case — Prosecution has not been able to prove its case to hilt beyond shadow of doubt against accused regarding illegal recovery of heroin—Conviction is not liable to sustain—Set-aside.

       Appeal Allowed.

       

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

1. This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23rd September, 1999 passed by then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi in Criminal Case No. 559 of 1995 arising out of Case Crime No. 146 of 1995, P.S. Maruwadih District Varanasi whereby the accused appellant Anil Kumar has been convicted and awarded punishment under Section 21 of NDPS Act of 10 years rigorous imprisonment, fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two years rigorous imprisonment.

2. Facts of this case, in nut-shell, are as follows.

3. On 3.9.1995 S.I. Pramod Kumar Pandey (PW-1), along with Head Constable Shyam Narain Yadav (PW-3) were busy in night patrolling duty and and were present at Maruwadih Inter-Section (Chauraha). There, they received information from an informer that one person was coming from the side of Lahartara and would go towards Shivdaspur Mandi. He had heroin with him. If police party promptly reached there he could be arrested. Believing this information to be true PW-1 (Pramod Kumar Pandey, Sub-inspctor) and PW-3 (Shyam Narain Yadav, (Head Constable) along with informer reached near Shivdaspur Mandi tri-section and concealing themselves behind Gomti situated there, waited for the said person to arrive. After some time the said person coming from the side of Lahartara reached Mandi tri-section. The informer pointed him out and went away from there. PW-1 Pramod Kumar Pandey directed that person to stop but looking to the police personnel, he turned around and tried to run away but was caught with the help of PW-3, Shyam Narain Yadav at 20.30 hours. On inquiry from him, he disclosed his name to be Anil Kumar Dubey s/o Vanshi Dhar Dubey. He was told that an information was received that he possessed contraband substance and that, if he wanted, he could be searched in presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. At this, the accused stated that as he had already been arrested, therefore, his search could be made by them only. Pursuant to that consent his personal search was made in presence of PW-3, Shyam Narain Yadav and from right side of his trouser one match box was recovered which was tucked in his trouser. From the said match-box seven pudias (small packets) of brown sugar (Heroin) were recovered and when asked to show the licence to keep the same, he started apologising. He was apprised that this act of his amounted to offence under Section 21 of NDPS Act and thereafter he was taken into custody. All the seven pudias of heroin were placed again in the said match-box and were wrapped in a cloth and in the light of torch and electricity they were sealed on the spot and its sample seal was also prepared. At the time of his arrest a large number of people had assembled there who went away from there, when told to be the witness to the said recovery. The recovery memo was prepared on the spot in the light of torch and electricity and was read out to the accused and PW-3. Thereafter, the signature was obtained thereon of the accused. A copy of the said recovery memo (Exhibit Ka-1) was provided to the accused. The PW-3, Shyam Narain Yadav went to the police station with the recovered contraband substance along with sample seal and the accused and got the case registered. Chick FIR (photo copy paper no. 9Ka/1), was prepared by Shivdarshan Giri (not examined) and the entry of this case was made by him in General Diary dated 3.9.1995 (Paper no. 9ka/1), at report no. 38 at time 20.30 hours. The Investigation was assinged to Inspector Nafees Ahmad (PW-2), who made inspection of the place of occurrence at the instance of PW-1 and prepared the site plan (Exhibit Ka-2). He had sent the contraband substance recovered from the accused to FSL through Constable Sanjay Kumar Tiwari on 11.9.1995, whereafter the FSL sent its report (Exhibit Ka-4), in which it was found that all the seven pudias contained hereoin. Thereafter, PW-2, Nafees Ahmad after hav





























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top