Married Daughter Cannot Be Excluded From Compassionate Appointment Solely On The Ground Of Marriage: Chhattisgarh High Court Allahabad HC Condemns Lawyers Seeking Adjournments To Attend District Courts Inherent Powers Under Section 151 CPC Cannot Be Invoked For Restoration Of Possession When Statutory Remedy Of Restitution Exists: Calcutta High Court Invoke Preventive Detention Laws Against Sand Mining Kingpins: Supreme Court Directs ED Probe To Protect Chambal Sanctuary Res Judicata Bars Pendente Lite Purchaser From Re-Agitating Impleadment Under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC If Rejected Under Order I Rule 10: Supreme Court Consumer Complaints Can Continue Against Promoters & Co-Developers Even If Corporate Debtor Is Under IBC Moratorium: Supreme Court IBC Moratorium Protects Only Corporate Debtor, Does Not Bar Consumer Complaints Against Promoters & Directors: Supreme Court Vehicle Registration Certificate Relevant But Not Conclusive For Deciding Interim Custody Under Section 451 CrPC: Supreme Court Lawyer Has No Unqualified Right To Continuous Presence During Entire Interrogation Under Section 38 BNSS: Supreme Court Mandating Continuous Videography Of Accused During Transit Is Unworkable, May Lead To Unfounded Allegations: Supreme Court Centre Introduces FCRA Amendment Bill 2026: Proposes Vesting Of Defunct NGO Assets In 'Designated Authority', Mandates Prior Nod For Probe Written Communication Of Grounds Of Arrest Not Mandatory For Arrests Prior To SC's 'Mihir Rajesh Shah' Judgment: Orissa High Court Passing Ex-Parte Maintenance Order Without Verifying Status Of WhatsApp Or Email Notice Violates Natural Justice: Madhya Pradesh High Court Training ChatGPT On Copyrighted News Is 'Fair Dealing', Does Not Amount To Infringement: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enjoin OpenAI Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rethinking Access to Justice: Proposing a Client-Choice Bar-Integrated Model as a Viable Alternative to the LADC System Delhi Police Grants Permission To Advocates To Protest At Jantar Mantar On August 7 Over LADC Concerns Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Compliance With Section 42 NDPS Act Mandatory; Ruqa Deemed Sufficient: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Conviction in NDPS Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, presided over by Justice Pankaj Jain, dismissed an appeal challenging the conviction of Avtar Singh @ Jagtar Singh @ Jagga under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), 1985. The judgment, delivered on 1st April 2024, meticulously evaluated the compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act.

The crux of the legal debate revolved around the mandatory compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. The section mandates recording and communicating the information of narcotic activities to the immediate superior officer before conducting a search and seizure. The appellant’s counsel argued that the procedure was not adequately followed, contending that the communication, termed ‘Ruqa’, did not satisfy the requirement of Section 42.

Avtar Singh was apprehended on 23rd March 2019 with 27 grams of heroin. The arrest followed a ‘Ruqa’ sent by ASI Faqir Singh to the police station, post receiving confidential information about Singh’s illicit activities. The appellant was subsequently convicted for the offense under Section 21(b) read with Section 31 of the NDPS Act. The primary issue was whether the ‘Ruqa’ met the requirements of Section 42 of the NDPS Act.

Compliance with Section 42: The court, referencing various precedents, including Karnail Singh vs. State of Haryana, emphasized the mandatory nature of Section 42 compliance. It was held that recording of information and its immediate communication to a superior officer is imperative.

Validity of Ruqa: The court deemed the ‘Ruqa’ as a valid form of compliance. Justice Jain observed that the nomenclature of the communication does not detract from its legality. It was held that the ‘Ruqa’ effectively met the Section 42 mandate.

Search and Seizure Procedure: The court confirmed that the search was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, adhering to the Section 50 NDPS Act requirement. Furthermore, the prior conviction of the appellant under the NDPS Act reinforced the legitimacy of the search and subsequent arrest.

Decision The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant, affirming that both the mandates of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were complied with. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that there was no merit in challenging the procedures followed in the seizure and arrest of Avtar Singh.

Date of Decision: 1st April 2024

Avtar Singh @ Jagtar Singh @ Jagga Vs. State of Punjab

Latest Legal News