Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K 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