-
by sayum
14 September 2026 7:36 AM
The Supreme Court stated that the presence of "morphine" and "meconic acid" in the seized contraband is sufficient proof that it is a "opium poppy" as specified in Section 2(xvii) of the NDPS Act.
The prosecution failed to prove that the seized material is not the origin of a plant of Papaver somniferum L or any other plant, which is not recognised by the Central Government under Section 2(xvii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, leading to the Himachal Pradesh High Court's acquittal of the NDPS accused in this case.
The Supreme Court's panel of Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath took note of a recent decision in the case State of Himachal Pradesh v. Nirmal Kaur alias Nimmo while the appeals filed by the State were up for hearing.
The bench stated that it has been decided that the discovery of "morphine" and "meconic acid" in the confiscated material is sufficient to prove that it fits the definition of Section 2(xvii) of the NDPS Act.
Therefore, in accordance with the ruling in Nirmal Kaur alias Nimmo, the court overturned the decisions from the High Court and sent the cases back for further consideration (supra).
Nimmo (Nirmal Kaur) Judgment
In the case of Nirmal Kaur alias Nimmo, Justices BR Gavai and CT Ravikumar made the following observation:
It is sufficient to establish that the seized "poppy straw" is covered by subclause (a) of Clause (xvii) of Section 2 of the 1985 Act and no additional test would be required to establish that the seized material is a part of "papaver somniferum L" once a Chemical Examiner establishes that the seized "poppy straw" indicates a positive test for the contents of "morphine" and "meconic acid." To put it another way, once it is proven that the confiscated "poppy straw" tested positive for the presence of "morphine" and "meconic acid," no further testing would be required to prove the accused's guilt in accordance with Section 15 of the 1985 Act.
State of Himachal Pradesh
vs
Angejo Devi
