MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Absence of Compliance with Section  52 A of NDPS Act Provisions Leads to Acquittal: Supreme Court Quashes Conviction in Ganja Seizure Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment dated March 1, 2024, acquitted the appellants in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) case. The bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta highlighted significant procedural lapses and evidentiary inconsistencies, leading to the quashing of the lower courts' convictions.

The case involved the appellants Mohammed Khalid and another, who were initially convicted under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act for alleged possession and transportation of 80 kg of ganja. The High Court upheld the trial court’s verdict, which was subsequently challenged in the Supreme Court.

The apex court pointed out critical flaws in the seizure and sampling process. It was observed that the prosecution failed to comply with essential provisions of the NDPS Act, notably Section 52A, which deals with the preparation of inventory and sampling in the presence of a jurisdictional Magistrate. The court noted, "The absence of compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act rendered the FSL report ineffectual."

Moreover, the Supreme Court found major inconsistencies in the prosecution's narrative and the handling of evidence, particularly the admissibility of the confession to police, which was deemed inadmissible under Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

In light of these observations, the Supreme Court acquitted the accused, overturning the decisions of the trial court and the High Court. The judgment underscored the necessity of strict adherence to procedural norms in criminal cases, especially under the NDPS Act

 

Date of Decision:March 1, 2024

Mohammed Khalid and Another vs. The State of Telangana, 

Latest Legal News