Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Himachal High Court Acquits Appellants due to Insufficient Evidence and Procedural Lapse

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, a recent judgment by the High Court has resulted in the acquittal of two individuals, Jagat Singh and Shaveg Singh, who were facing charges under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. The verdict, delivered by a bench of the High Court, highlighted several crucial legal aspects that led to the acquittal of the appellants.

The judgment, authored by the bench, scrutinized the evidence presented by the prosecution and meticulously analyzed the various legal provisions pertaining to the case. The appellants were accused of being involved in the transportation of contraband poppy husk, and they were convicted under Section 29 of the Act, which pertains to abetment and criminal conspiracy related to narcotics offenses.

The High Court's analysis emphasized the importance of proving a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. The court noted that for a conspiracy charge to hold, there must be substantial evidence of an agreement between the accused parties to commit an unlawful act. The absence of concrete evidence in this regard played a crucial role in the court's decision to acquit the appellants.

Furthermore, the judgment critically examined the compliance of legal procedures during the arrest, seizure, and handling of evidence. The court scrutinized the fulfillment of Section 52A of the Act, which relates to drawing samples from seized contraband for testing. Discrepancies and inconsistencies in the handling and documentation of evidence were meticulously examined, leading the court to raise doubts about the credibility of the prosecution's case.

The judgment also discussed the presumption of possession of illicit articles under Section 54 of the Act. While acknowledging this presumption, the court highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence and the need to establish a strong link between the accused and the seized contraband.

The High Court's verdict highlights the critical role that evidence, legal procedures, and burden of proof play in criminal cases involving narcotics offenses. The acquittal of the appellants underscores the principle that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and that the prosecution must adhere to stringent legal standards in presenting its case.

Date of Decision: 14 August 2023

Jagat Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh     

Latest Legal News