GRANTS BAIL IN NDPS CASE, HOLDS DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS ALONE INSUFFICIENT FOR CONVICTION Foreign Conviction Does Not Shield Accused from Indian Prosecution: Uttarakhand High Court Denies Bail in Bitcoin Money Laundering Case Forfeiture of Earnest Money Must Be Reasonable, No Interest Payable If Buyer Cancels Due to Falling Property Prices: Supreme Court IBPS | Exam Bodies Must Provide Scribes and Extra Time to All Disabled Candidates, Not Just Those With Benchmark Disabilities: Supreme Court Minor Discrepancies in Witness Statements Do Not Discredit Their Reliability," Rules Punjab and Haryana High Court in Murder Case Suspicion, No Matter How Strong, Cannot Replace Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Karnataka High Court Acquits Two in Murder Case Prolonged Incarceration Violates Article 21 – Bail Granted Despite NDPS Act Restrictions: Kerala High Court Kolkata Book Fair Not a Public Function: Calcutta High Court Dismisses VHP's Writ Petition A Gift With Conditions is Not a Gift in Perpetuity – Violation of Purpose Mandates Reversion: Andhra Pradesh High Court Employee Cannot Demand Advocate in Domestic Enquiry Unless Employer’s Representative is a Legally Trained Mind: Bombay High Court Milkman as Scribe Raises Eyebrows: High Court Dismisses Property Claim Over Suspicious Will Contractor Bound by Contractual Terms, No Right to Claim Damages After Accepting Extensions: Supreme Court On Failure of the Highest Bidder, Property Must Be Re-Auctioned, Private Negotiation Impermissible: Karnataka High Court Preventive Detention Without Procedural Compliance is Unconstitutional: Kerala High Court Quashes Detention Order Under KAAPA Courts Are for Litigants, Not the Other Way Around: Madras High Court Overhauls Family Court Procedures Landlord is the Best Judge of His Requirement; Tenant Cannot Dictate Alternative Properties: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Eviction Khatedari Rights Cannot Be Claimed Over SC Land Through Adverse Possession: Rajasthan High Court A Law Cannot Be Struck Down on Overruled Precedents: Calcutta High Court Upholds West Bengal Entry Tax Act Producer of Film Is First Owner of Soundtrack Unless Contract States Otherwise: Delhi High Court Affirms Saregama’s Rights Mere Refusal to Repay a Loan Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide Under Section 306 IPC: Allahabad High Court Mere Re-Appreciation of Evidence Is Not Permissible in a Second Appeal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Merely Alleging Money Laundering Without Evidence is an Abuse of Legal Process: Bombay High Court Imposed 1 Lakh Cost on ED Right to Private Defence is Not Absolute and Cannot Extend to Inflicting Fatal Injuries: Punjab and Haryana High Court Failure to Pay Business Dues Does Not Constitute a Criminal Offense: Calcutta High Court Quashes Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust Proceedings Income Tax | Reassessment Notices Must Pass Surviving Time Test—Delhi High Court Directs AOs to Comply with Supreme Court's Rajeev Bansal Ruling Perjury Allegations Against Wife and Counsel Dismissed; Court Imposes Costs for Frivolous Litigation: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Permits Protest on Temple Land Encroachment Issue, Imposes Restrictions for Public Order A Senior Citizen’s Right to Peace Cannot Be Held Hostage by a Permissive Occupant: Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders Eviction of Son-in-Law from Father-in-Law’s House Widows Applying on Merit Cannot Be Denied Relaxation Under Two-Child Norm: Rajasthan High Court

Failure to Comply with Mandatory Procedural Requirements under NDPS Act Leads to Acquittal: Supreme Court Emphasizes on Due Process in Narcotics Cases

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India, presided over by Justices Aniruddha Bose and Augustine George Masih, acquitted Smt. Najmunisha and Abdul Hamid Chandmiya in a narcotics case, underlining crucial procedural lapses in search and seizure operations under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The decision, delivered on 9th April 2024, casts light on the importance of adhering to statutory safeguards in narcotics investigations.

The core issue of the judgment centers around the mandatory procedural compliance in search and seizure under the NDPS Act and the validity of confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act.

 

Najmunisha and Abdul Hamid Chandmiya were convicted of narcotic substance possession and trafficking. Central to the appeals were questions regarding the compliance with Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act during the search and seizure and the admissibility of confessional statements as per Section 67 of the NDPS Act.

 

Procedural Non-Compliance: The Court identified critical failures in the search and seizure process, including the lack of proper authorization and discrepancies in the raiding party’s testimony, leading to doubts about the prosecution’s integrity.

Confessional Statements Under Section 67: Aligning with the precedent in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Court held that statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are not confessional for trial purposes, as the officers recording these statements lack police investigation authority.

Upholding of Fundamental Rights and Fair Trial Principles: The judgment emphasized Article 21 of the Constitution, criticizing the investigation for not adhering to due process, thus affecting the credibility of the prosecution’s case and violating the accused’s fundamental rights.

The appellants were acquitted due to the noted procedural lapses and inadmissibility of crucial evidence, with the Court granting them the benefit of doubt.

Date of Decision: 9th April 2024

Smt. Najmunisha vs. The State of Gujarat & Narcotics Control Bureau

 

Similar News