UP Land Revenue Act | Map Correction Cannot Be Done By Mechanically Transferring Land To Compensate Deficiency Of Adjoining Plot: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction In Injunction Suit Between Private Parties Not Barred If Title Or Vesting In Panchayat Not In Issue: P&H High Court District Consumer Commission Duty-Bound To Refer Product For Laboratory Analysis When Prayed For; Cannot Dismiss For Want Of Expert Evidence: Punjab State Commission Section 135(3) BNSS | Executive Magistrate Cannot Demand Interim Bond Without Commencing Inquiry; Must Supply Kalandara Material & Follow Madhu Limaye Safeguards: Delhi High Court In Neha Bora Sections 126 & 130 BNSS | Writ Court Cannot Evaluate Sufficiency Of Material At Show-Cause Stage Unless There Is 'Nil Material': Delhi High Court Section 32 Evidence Act | Multiple Dying Declarations Cannot Be Discarded Over Minor Variations If Core Substratum Imputing Fatal Blow Remains Consistent: Allahabad High Court Multiple FIRs Arising From Identical Financial Scheme Can Be Clubbed And Transferred To First FIR Court: Bombay High Court POCSO | Mandating Injury Report Indicating Penetrative Assault For Victim Compensation Violates Article 14, Frustrates Sec 164-A CrPC: Allahabad High Court Section 308 IPC | Premeditation & Requisite Intention Must Be Proved; Single Blow With Stone In Sudden Fight Attracts Section 325 IPC: Delhi High Court Organizing A Book Fair Is A Private Activity And Not A 'Public Function' Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226: Calcutta High Court Prior Permission From Education Officer Before Issuing Recruitment Advertisement Is Mandatory, Not An Empty Formality: Bombay High Court Order 41 Rule 5 CPC | Tenant Facing Eviction Decree Liable To Pay Mesne Profits At Market Rate Till Delivery Of Possession: Himachal Pradesh High Court Anticipatory Bail In Matrimonial Disputes | Allegations Of Sexual Misconduct Cannot Be Treated As Automatic Grounds For Custodial Interrogation: Delhi High Court Section 35 BNSS | Notice For Appearance Under Section 35(3) Is Not A Mandatory Precondition For Arrest Under Section 104 Of The Customs Act: Gujarat High Court Section 58 BNSS | 24-Hour Cap Is An Outer Limit, Not A Licence To Detain Accused Until Morning Court Hours: Kerala High Court Section 106 Evidence Act Cannot Fill Gaps In Circumstantial Chain, Last-Seen Theory Fails Without Proximity To Time Of Death: Karnataka High Court Service Law | Procedural Violation In Domestic Inquiry Not Fatal Unless Delinquent Proves Real Prejudice: Bombay High Court Indian Succession Act | Unequal Disposition Or Exclusion Of Legal Heir Does Not Invalidate Will If Due Execution Proved: Madras High Court Civil Services Rules | Seniority Counts From Initial Appointment If Normal Probation Completed Without Extension; Minor Penalty Cannot Depress Rank: High Court Pre-Arrest Bail Under Section 31 DV Act Cannot Be Denied If Accused Had No Notice Of Protection Order: Kerala High Court Section 50 NDPS Act Applies Only To Personal Search, Inapplicable To Search Of Bag Carried By Accused: Himachal Pradesh High Court Railway Rolling Stock Transfers to IRFC Must Be Classified to Determine Sales Tax Liability Under Delhi Sales Tax Act: Delhi High Court No Contributory Negligence Can Be Attributed To Pillion Rider In Road Accident: Karnataka High Court Nasha Mukti Center Cannot Detain Adult Based Merely On Spouse's Consent Without Medical Mandate: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab Land Revenue Act | Revenue Officer Must Strictly Adhere To Approved Mode Of Partition Verbatim: Punjab & Haryana High Court Labour Court Can Draw Adverse Inference Against Employer For Non-Production Of Employment Records: P&H High Court Closure Of Evidence | Past Conduct Prior To Deposition Irrelevant For Deciding Plea To Adduce Further Evidence: Orissa High Court Supreme Court's Mandate In 'Mihir Rajesh Shah' On Supplying Written Grounds Of Arrest Applies Prospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Allegations Of Forceful Sexual Intercourse Raised After 14 Years Of Marriage Without Complaints Cannot Constitute Cruelty Under Section 13(1)(ia) Hindu Marriage Act: Telangana High Court Punjab Municipal Act | Municipality Alleging Unauthorised Construction Must Prove Violation By Cogent Evidence, Injunction Suit Maintainable Without Sec 49 Notice: P&H High Court Arbitration Act | Limitation To Challenge Award Commences From Date Certified Copy Is Obtained If Signed Copy Not Delivered Under Section 31(5): Madhya Pradesh High Court Pension Regulations | Voluntary Retirement Weightage Cannot Be Claimed By Employees Retired Prematurely Under Regulation 19(1): Telangana High Court Compassionate Appointment Cannot Be Denied Solely Due To Marital Status; Judicial Declaration Operates Retrospectively: Allahabad High Court Transfer Of Female Employees With Infants | Administrative Exigency Must Yield To Constitutional Right Of Motherhood And Child Welfare: Rajasthan High Court Consumer Protection Act | Summary Jurisdiction Cannot Resolve Complex Factual Disputes Requiring Detailed Evidence & Cross-Examination: Punjab State Consumer Commission

Neutral substance quantity must be considered while  contraband as'small' or 'commercial'- Supreme Court

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


 

While classifying the amount of contraband discovered as a "small quantity" or "commercial quantity," the Supreme Court reaffirmed that neutral substance quantity cannot be disregarded.

The Kerala High Court in this case allowed the appeal brought by the accused who had been found guilty in an NDPS case by relying on its earlier decision in E. Micheal Raj V. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau 2005(2) Crimes 181 (the challenged ruling, which was rendered in 2007).

The decision in E. Micheal Raj [(2008) 5 SCC 161] was later overturned in Hira Singh Vs. Union of India, the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka remarked when the appeal against this decision was scheduled for hearing last week.

There is no argument regarding the fact that the judicial decision in Hira Singh v. Union of India & Anr., reported as 2020 SCC Online SC 382, now resolves the issue and states that the decision of this Court relied upon in the contested judgement, "E. Micheal Raj V. Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, (2008) 5 SCC 161," is no longer good law and that the quantity of the neutral substance cannot be disregarded when calculating the amount "The bench declared.

The bench noted the following when granting the State's appeal: "Given the aforementioned circumstances, we are forced to accept the appeal and maintain the 10-year sentence that the Trial Court imposed. Although we are aware of the absurdity of the situation caused by the extended pending of the current appeal, the in question judgement is from the 28.3.2007, or 15 years ago "The Supreme Court's three-judge panel had made the following ruling in Hira Singh (supra):

(I)This Court's ruling in the case of E. Micheal Raj (Supra) taking the position that, when determining the small quantity or commercial quantity of a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance in a mixture with one or more neutral substance(s), the quantity of the neutral substance(s) is not to be taken into consideration and that, instead, only the actual content by weight of the offending narcotic drug is relevant for the purpose of the investigation (II). If narcotics or psychotropic substances are found in a mixture with one or more neutral substances, the quantity of the neutral substance(s) must be considered when determining the "small or commercial quantity" of the narcotics or psychotropic substances, along with the actual content by weight of the offending substance.

Intelligence Officer, Thiruvananthapuram

vs

K K Naushad 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Legal News