Back
'Beyond Imagination': Patna HC Frees Man After 27 Years, Slams NDPS Case Sans Report
In a scathing rebuke to sloppy policing and prosecution lapses, the has acquitted Tilakhdhari Yadav, overturning his 2010 conviction under the after a grueling 27-year legal battle. Justice Alok Kumar Pandey lambasted the trial court for upholding a case built on sand—minus forensic proof that seized ganja was even contraband, non-compliance with mandatory search safeguards, and crumbling witness testimonies.
Raid in Shahpur Bazar: A Tip-Off Turns into a Lifetime Ordeal
It all began on , when Sub-Inspector Ram Vilas Singh (PW-2) of received a secret tip about Yadav selling ganja from a thatched hut in Shahpur Bazar, Bhojpur district. Leading a team to arrest warrant evaders, Singh raided the hut around 10 AM, claiming to recover about 500 grams of ganja in a blue jeans bag under Yadav's thigh, plus smaller packets (10x2g and 2x5g) and a 500g iron scale. Yadav, caught allegedly fleeing, had no license.
Police registered Shahpur PS Case No. 7/1998 under . The trial court convicted him in 2010, slapping 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and ₹20,000 fine—despite the ~530g haul qualifying as " " in 1998, capping punishment at six months or ₹10,000 fine. Yadav appealed in 2011, securing bail, and awaited justice until .
Defense Strikes at the Core: 'No Proof, No Case'
Yadav's counsel, and , tore into the prosecution. Key blows: - Wrong Sentence : 530g ganja was " " under 1998 NDPS rules—no 10-year term justified. - Section 50 Violation : Police never informed Yadav of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, vitiating the entire raid. - Hostile Independents : Seizure witnesses Rajesh Kumar Gupta (PW-5) and Md. Sagir Shah (PW-6) turned hostile, denying recovery and claiming signatures on blank papers. - Unproven Hut & Possession : No boundaries specified; no link proving Yadav's exclusive control. - No Science : Zero report confirming ganja; no weighing, sampling details exhibited. - Shoddy Probe : IO (PW-3) recorded no statements; contradictions between PW-2 and PW-4 (e.g., PW-4 silent on small packets).
They urged acquittal for prosecution's failure .
State's Stand: Police Word Enough, But Sentence Slip Conceded
leaned on PW-2 (informant) and PW-4 (raider), claiming consistent recovery tales. Hostile independents? Not fatal with official backing. But he fairly admitted the sentence mismatched " " limits and pre-2001 NDPS slabs.
Unraveling Threads: Why the Case Collapsed
Justice Pandey dissected testimonies ruthlessly. PW-1 (irrelevant), PW-3 (perfunctory IO)—out. PW-2 couldn't pinpoint hut boundaries or witnesses' roles; admitted no seized items in court. PW-4 contradicted on packets, no weighing seen, vague location. Crucially, PW-5/6 denied everything.
No
?
"Crystal clear... how the seized item was alleged to be Ganja without having any
report."
Section 50 ignored. No
proved—
"no reliable evidence... cottage exclusively belonged to the appellant."
Contradictions riddled the rest.
As other reports noted, the court wondered how chargesheet flew sans forensics, echoing "beyond imagination."
Key Observations
"From perusal of the record, it is crystal clear that seized item/Ganja was not sent for chemical examination. The question arises how the seized item was alleged to be Ganja without having anyreport... It is beyond the imagination that without any examination, the recovered materials were declared to be narcotic substance."
"...non-compliance of mandatory provision ofunder which it wasof the searching officer to inform the accused of his right to be searched in presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate and in absence of compliance of said provision, the alleged search and seizure stands vitiated."
"PW-5 and 6 are independent witnesses and witnesses of seizure list, but they have not supported the case of prosecution... crux of the prosecution story has not been proved."
"...prosecution has failed to establish alleged recovery fromof the appellant... no reliable evidence to show that cottage exclusively belonged to the appellant."
Freedom at Last: Appeal Allowed, Conviction Shredded
"Prosecution case suffers from several infirmities... not a fit case where conviction could have been recorded."
The
judgment stands set aside; Yadav, on bail, walks free. Jail superintendent notified; records remitted.
This ruling reinforces NDPS rigor: no shortcuts on forensics, safeguards, or proof. Future cases? Expect scrutiny on "recovery" claims sans science, bolstering defenses in small-quantity hauls.
