MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Independent Witnesses Not Mandatory to Prove Charges Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar, upheld the conviction of an appellant under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The appellant, Jagwinder Singh, was convicted for possessing 54 Kgs of poppy husk.

The apex court’s decision, delivered on November 2nd, reaffirmed the judgments of both the Trial Court and the High Court. In a key observation, the Supreme Court noted, “Law does not require only an independent witness to prove a charge attracting the provisions of NDPS Act.” This remark highlights a crucial aspect of evidence law in narcotic cases, underscoring the court’s stance on the necessity of independent witnesses in NDPS cases.

The appeal raised significant questions regarding the procedural compliance in the seizure and recovery of narcotics. The court observed that non-filling of the CFCL form at the site of arrest and recovery, and the delay in sending samples for the FSL report, were not fatal to the prosecution’s case. This clarification from the Supreme Court adds a new dimension to the understanding of procedural requirements under the NDPS Act.

The counsel for the appellant, Mrs. Kiran Bhardwaj, alongside Mr. V. K. Verma and Mr. Rajat Srivastav, contended that the appellant was not in conscious possession of the contraband and argued procedural lapses in the case. However, the court dismissed these arguments, finding no merit in the appeal.

The State’s case was represented by Ms. Nupur Kumar and Ms. Muskan Nagpal, who successfully argued that the concurrent findings of the lower courts regarding the appellant’s conviction were justified.

This ruling is significant as it clarifies the evidentiary requirements in cases under the NDPS Act and reinforces the court’s approach towards handling narcotic offences. The decision also serves as a precedent for future cases involving similar charges and circumstances.

As the court concluded the hearing, all pending applications related to the case were disposed of, bringing a close to a long-contested legal battle.

Date of Decision: 2 November, 2023

JAGWINDER SINGH VS STATE OF PUNJAB

Latest Legal News