Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights Home Station Preferences Upheld in Transfer Case: Kerala High Court Overrules Tribunal on Teachers' Transfer Policy Failure to Formally Request Cross-Examination Does Not Invalidate Assessment Order: Calcutta High Court

Irregularities and Non-Compliance with Mandatory Provisions: Allahabad High Court Quashes Conviction in NDPS Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has set aside the conviction of Lavkesh Singh and Pawan Kumar, appellants in a high-profile narcotics case. Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar, in his detailed judgment dated January 23, 2024, highlighted various lapses in the adherence to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, leading to the quashing of the lower court's decision.

The appellants were previously convicted by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Lucknow, in Criminal Case No. 128 of 2010 under various sections of the NDPS Act for the offense of transporting narcotics.

Justice Pawar, in his observation, pointed out the non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, which mandates the procedure for search and seizure. "There appears to be an absolute violation of section 42(2) of the 1985 Act," the judgment read, emphasizing the failure to obtain a search warrant and to send the recorded information to a superior officer within the stipulated 72-hour period.

The handling and custody of the seized narcotics also came under scrutiny. The judgment noted, "Violation of Section 55 of NDPS Act observed. Inadequate evidence regarding the safe custody and handling of the narcotics from the time of seizure to deposition in the malkhana (evidence storage)."

Further, the judgment underscored the absence of independent witnesses and insufficient link evidence in the case. "Two independent witnesses not produced in court, raising questions about the authenticity of the raid and seizure operations," the court observed.

One of the critical aspects of the judgment was the court's stance on the question of conscious possession. The judgment stated, "The issue of conscious possession, crucial in NDPS cases, was not sufficiently addressed during the trial, impacting the assessment of the appellants’ culpability."

Based on these observations, the High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentencing imposed by the lower court. This judgment has once again brought to the fore the need for strict adherence to procedural norms and legal mandates in criminal cases, especially those dealing with narcotics.

Date of Decision: 23.1.2024

Lavkesh Singh And Pawan Kumar   VS Union Of India Thru.

 

Similar News