Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Must Implement Modified Preliminary Decree In Full: Telangana High Court Directs Partition Of Property Omitted In Final Decree Proceedings If Grievance Is Real But Lies Before Different Forum, Plaint Should Be Returned Under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, Not Rejected: Rajasthan High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due To Severity Of Economic Offence If Evidence Is Documentary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Compliance With Mandatory Duty To Inform Grounds Of Arrest Under Section 47 BNSS Is Impermissible: Orissa High Court Grants Bail Land Acquisition Award Finality Under Section 12 Is A Bar To Writ Petitions Challenging 'Public Necessity': Madhya Pradesh High Court State As Eminent Domain Is Obligated To Pay Adequate Compensation, Not Minimum To Suit Its Convenience: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Grants Emergency Parole To Life Convict To Execute Sale Deed, Repay Bank Loan To Prevent Family's Eviction High Court Cannot Act As Court Of First Instance In Service Matters Amenable To CAT Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Election Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction To Declare Caste Certificate Forged, Authority Vests Solely With Scrutiny Committee: Allahabad High Court Order IX Rule 7 CPC Requires 'Good Cause' Not 'Sufficient Cause'; Trial Court Can't Apply Higher Threshold To Pre-Decree Proceedings: Telangana High Court Victim Cannot Maintain Appeal Seeking Enhancement Of Sentence Under Section 372 CrPC; Such Power Exclusively With State: Rajasthan High Court Disability Pension: Presumption In Favour Of Personnel If Found Fit At Enrollment; Percentage Must Be Rounded Off: Punjab & Haryana HC Employee Entitled To Second Kramonnati Benefit If Promotion To Higher Post Does Not Result In Higher Pay Scale: Madhya Pradesh High Court Borrowers Can Be Granted Opportunity To Clear Loan Overdues In Installments To Prevent Coercive Action Under SARFAESI Act: Kerala High Court

NDPS |unnatural and improbable nature of the prosecution's story - Subsequent FIR Contrary to Settled Law, Acquittal Inevitable: Punjab and Haryana HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a landmark judgment, acquitted Saurav Partap @ Sourav @ Sunny and another in a drug trafficking case under the NDPS Act. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, in his ruling, emphasized the illegality of registering a subsequent FIR based on the same transaction, terming it "contrary to settled law," leading to the acquittal of the appellants.

The judgment focused on the legal impropriety of registering multiple FIRs for a series of acts connected to the same transaction. The defense's argument was anchored in the precedent that subsequent FIRs, arising from disclosure statements in an ongoing investigation, are legally untenable.

The case traced back to the arrest of one Sandeep Kumar @ Bhamari, who was found in possession of smack. Following his arrest, Kumar implicated the appellants, leading to their arrest and the recovery of more narcotics. This sequence of events spurred the registration of a second FIR, which became the central issue in the appeal.

Justice Bedi critically assessed the evidence and the sequence of events, underscoring the unnatural and improbable nature of the prosecution's story. He pointed out the legal misstep in registering the second FIR, drawing from precedents like Mr. David Johnson vs State of Goa and Naresh Kakkar vs The State of. The absence of independent witnesses and the sidelining of local police in the recovery process further weakened the prosecution's case.

The Court overturned the conviction and sentence dated 14.09.2015 by the Special Court, Amritsar, acquitting the appellants. This decision hinged on the principle against multiple FIRs for the same transaction and the dubious circumstances of the prosecution's narrative.

Date of Decision: 15.02.2024

Saurav Partap @ Sourav @ Sunny & Another vs State of Punjab

Latest Legal News