NDPS | Minor Discrepancies Do Not Vitiate Conviction When Evidence Is Consistent: Goa High Court

"Minor Discrepancies Cannot Undermine Strict Compliance with NDPS Provisions"—Court on Procedural Safeguards. Goa High Court upheld the conviction of Subodh Levi under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, dismissing his appeal challenging the Special Court’s verdict that sentenced him to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. The court ruled that there was full compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act, including Sections 50 and 52-A, and rejected claims of tampering with evidence.

Subodh Levi was convicted by the Special Court on October 13, 2021, for possession of LSD, a psychotropic substance, weighing 0.4 grams. He was sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹1 lakh. Levi appealed against the conviction, raising concerns about procedural violations during the raid and alleged tampering with the contraband.

The appellant contended that the police did not comply with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 50 and 52-A, and claimed that the prosecution failed to establish the exact weight of the narcotic substance.

The appellant argued that he was not properly informed of his right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer.

Levi alleged that the police did not follow proper procedures for handling and storing the contraband, raising concerns about the integrity of the evidence.

Levi contended that the contraband had been tampered with, as there was a delay in sending the sealed packet to the forensic laboratory and discrepancies in witness testimonies.

The court found that there was full compliance with Section 50, as the raiding officer had informed Levi in Hindi about his right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. The court noted that minor discrepancies in the exact words used did not invalidate the search process. The testimony of witnesses, including the independent pancha, confirmed that Levi was informed of his rights.

"Minor discrepancies cannot undermine the consistent and cogent evidence presented by the raiding officer and witnesses," the court stated.

The court held that there was no violation of Section 52-A, as the entire contraband was sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) for analysis. The court pointed out that the NDPS Act allows forwarding the entire contraband when it is a small quantity, making sampling unnecessary in this case.

"The forwarding of the entire contraband for analysis negates claims of non-compliance with Section 52-A," the court observed.

The court dismissed claims of tampering, noting that the contraband was properly sealed and handed over to the CFSL within a reasonable timeframe. The court found no evidence of tampering and ruled that the chain of custody was intact.

"The prosecution has successfully established the integrity of the evidence, and there is no ground to suspect tampering," the judgment read.

The Goa High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of Subodh Levi, ruling that the procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act were followed, and the evidence was properly handled. The court emphasized that minor inconsistencies in witness testimonies do not invalidate the conviction when the overall evidence is strong.

Date of Decision: October 7, 2024

Subodh Levi vs. The State of Goa​.