Where Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt, Benefit Must Go To The Accused: Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Murder Conviction Lok Adalat Award Cannot Override Registered Lease Deed: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Execution Petition for Eviction Deemed Conveyance Does Not Enlarge Title — Civil Court Must Adjudicate Ownership Disputes: Bombay High Court Common Intention Must Be Proved—No One Can Be Convicted Solely for Being Named Among a Group: Calcutta High Court Mere Abusive Language or Threat, Without Sexual Colour, Does Not Attract Section 354A IPC: Delhi High Court Forcing a Child to Carry the Trauma Is an Assault on Dignity: Gujarat High Court Allows Termination of 15-Week Pregnancy of 14-Year-Old Rape Survivor Framing of Charge is Not a Final Order, No Appeal Lies Under Section 14A of SC/ST Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Interest Earned from Axis Bank Is ‘Attributable’ to Credit Business – Not a Separate Source of Income: ITAT Chennai Grants 80P Deduction Must Be Proved, Not May Be Proved: Karnataka High Court Upholds Triple Murder Conviction On Complete Chain Of Circumstantial Evidence Statutory Scheme Overrides Hereditary Claims: Kerala High Court Upholds Executive Officer Appointment at Malamakkavu Ayyappa Temple No Mid-Stream Change In Examination Centre Once Exams Are Underway:  Orissa High Court Draws Line On Judicial Interference Forest Allegation Found Baseless, Petitioner Had Personal Grudge: NGT Dismisses Plea Alleging Illegal Mining in Raisen Protected Forest CPC Has No Role in Consumer Forums: National Commission Slams Procedural Missteps in Insurance Complaint Transfer Case Permit Is Not a Formality, It’s a Legal Necessity: Madhya Pradesh High Court Directs Insurer to ‘Pay and Recover’ for Accident Caused by Vehicle Plying Outside Authorized States A Compromise Before Court Is Not a Private Contract but a Solemn Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail Senior Citizens Misled with FD Promises Can’t Be Bound by Insurance Contracts: Chandigarh State Commission Upholds Full Refund with Interest No Specific Forum Under Trust Act to Adjudicate Election Disputes Involving Fraud: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Civil Court Jurisdiction Mere Presence is Not Conspiracy: Kerala High Court Grants Bail in Ganja Case Where Intermediate Quantity Alone Recovered from Accused Sufficient Cause Is Not a Matter of Sympathy, But Substance: Bombay High Court Rejects 645-Day Delay in Filing Review Petition

High Court Upholds Acquittal in Narcotics and Arms Act Case Due to Prosecution's Failure to Establish Custody and Non-Compliance with Procedures

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh upheld the acquittal of the accused in a case involving charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) and the Arms Act. The court, in its decision, emphasized the prosecution's failure to establish custody and non-compliance with the required procedures, leading to discrepancies in the case.

The court stated, "The prosecution case in the trial court was not only replete with material contradictions and discrepant on material aspects, but mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have been observed in breach." The judgment, delivered by Justices Rajesh Sekhri and Sanjeev Kumar, shed light on several crucial aspects that contributed to the acquittal.

The case revolved around the prosecution's claim that the accused, Yousuf Massi, had made a disclosure about the hiding of a pistol, live cartridges, and packets of heroin in his house and the land of the respondent, Sham Lal. However, the court found that the prosecution failed to establish the custody of the respondent with the investigating agency, which was crucial for proving the disclosure and subsequent recovery.

Furthermore, discrepancies in the prosecution's case were highlighted during the trial. Independent witnesses did not support the prosecution's version of events, weakening their argument. Additionally, the court pointed out that the prosecution failed to comply with the safe custody and forwarding procedures of the seized contraband, as mandated by the NDPS Act.

"The contraband recovered in the present case was not kept in safe custody and forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) in accordance with the law and without any delay," stated the court. This lapse in proper procedure cast doubt on the integrity of the evidence presented by the prosecution.

Considering these factors, the High Court upheld the trial court's judgment of acquittal, finding no illegality or impropriety in the decision. The court emphasized the prosecution's obligation to establish custody and comply with the necessary procedures to ensure a fair trial.

Date of Judgment: April 26, 2023

State of J&K vs  Sham Lal             

Latest Legal News