Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Munna – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard, Shri Avinash Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Bishvanath Nishad, learned AGA for the State.
2. By means of the captioned appeals the appellants have assailed the correctness of the judgment and order dated 21.08. 2007 by which the learned additional sessions judge, fast track court no 30 district Barabanki in criminal trial no 22/2000 State v Kamlesh Case crime no. 12/2000 convicted the appellant (Kamlesh) to undergo RI for six months and a fine of Rs 5000 and in default of fine further imprisonment of one month under section 8/18 NDPS Act and convicted Munna in criminal trial no 23/2000 State v Munna under section 8/18 NDPS Act sentencing him to undergo RI one year and also to pay fine of Rs 10000, to further undergo 2 months additional rigorous imprisonment.
CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
3. On 17.01.2000, S.O. Gauri Shankar, along with Constable Ashok Kumar Singh and Constable Anil Pratap Singh, departed from the police station in search of the wanted accused Ram Naresh related to Case Crime No. 3/2000 under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC Police Station Kothi, and upon reaching near Usmanpur, information was received throug
Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act is mandatory, and failure to adhere to procedural safeguards undermines convictions, particularly in cases with no independent corroboration.
NDPS Act – Search and seizer of contraband – Conviction set aside - prosecution has not complied with the provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act as the information alleged to have been received regardi....
Mandatory compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act is essential for lawful searches; failure to do so renders convictions unsustainable.
The court emphasized strict compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, holding that failure to inform the accused of his right to a personal search before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate invalidate....
Strict compliance with the provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, particularly in informing the accused of their right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, is mandatory and non-....
The mandatory requirements under Section 50 of the NDPS Act must be strictly followed to ensure an individual's rights during searches; failure to comply renders any recovery and subsequent convictio....
Non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act during the search invalidates the recovery of contraband, leading to acquittal.
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
