Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

"Allahabad High Court Acquits  in NDPS Case, Citing 'Miserable Failure' of Prosecution to Prove Charges Beyond Reasonable Doubt"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) acquitted Aasha Ram, who had been convicted under the stringent Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (N.D.P.S. Act). The Court's decision, delivered on March 20, 2024, by Justice Shamim Ahmed, has raised critical questions about the procedural compliance in narcotic cases and the reliability of police testimony.

In 2009, Aasha Ram was arrested alongside Jagram Kewat, with the police claiming recovery of 150 grams of morphine. The prosecution based its case primarily on the testimonies of three police officers, leading to his conviction by the trial court. Ram, however, maintained his innocence, challenging the procedural aspects of his arrest and search.

The High Court, scrutinizing the compliance with the N.D.P.S. Act, especially focused on the mandatory procedures outlined in Sections 50, 55, and 57. Justice Ahmed remarked, "the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant." This observation was pivotal in the court's decision to overturn the trial court's judgment.

Significantly, the judgment highlighted the absence of compliance with Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, which mandates that searches be conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The court's decision emphasized the safeguards intended to prevent the misuse of powers by law enforcement agencies.

In its deliberation, the court also cited prominent Supreme Court judgments that underscore the importance of procedural safeguards in cases involving stringent punishments, such as those under the N.D.P.S. Act.

This ruling has brought to the forefront the necessity of strict adherence to procedural requirements in narcotic cases, emphasizing the rights of the accused and the responsibilities of law enforcement. The acquittal of Aasha Ram not only highlights judicial scrutiny of narcotic cases but also underscores the need for transparent and accountable policing.

Date of Decided : 20-03-2024

AASHA RAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Latest Legal News