Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

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