Back
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K.SURENDER
Shaik Naim – Appellant
Versus
State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.SURENDER, J.
1. The appellants 1 and 2 were convicted for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘the Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years vide judgment in S.C.No.51 of 2012, dated 30.10.2013 passed by the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of NDPS Cases (I-Additional Sessions Judge) Warangal. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed.
2. During pendency of the appeal, the Superintendent of Jails, Central Prison, through letter dated 12.08.2024 informed that the 2nd appellant/A2 died on 30.05.2017. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal was dismissed as abated in respect of 2nd appellant/A2 by this Court on 02.09.2024.
3. Heard, Sri A.Prabhakar, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.
4. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that P.W.1 is the Sub- Inspector of Police, who was on patrolling duty on 06.03.2012. About 2.45 p.m, he along with other police reached Hanamkonda Bus Stand and near plot form No.8, they found two persons, i.e., A1 and A2, carrying two bags. P.W.1 and others stopped A1 and A2 and the bags were weigh
Failure to comply with procedural requirements under Section 52-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act undermines the prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act in the seizure and handling of contraband substances, and the requirement for th....
The requirement for the presence of a Magistrate during the sampling of seized narcotics is essential to ensure the integrity of evidence, and failure to comply with this requirement can lead to reas....
The judgment establishes that strict adherence to the procedural requirements of the N.D.P.S. Act is essential for the validity of evidence in drug-related cases, particularly the necessity of involv....
Seizure of Ganja – FSL report cannot be considered as primary evidence and in absence of primary evidence, trial gets vitiated.
Compliance with procedural requirements for sample collection under the N.D.P.S. Act is essential; failure to do so raises reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case.
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of trial.
The prosecution must prove possession of contraband beyond a reasonable doubt, and non-compliance with procedural requirements can undermine evidence integrity.
Non-examination of independent witnesses is not fatal to the prosecution in NDPS cases; minor sampling irregularities do not undermine the case’s integrity, and mandatory sentences under the NDPS Act....
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
