After Admitting Lease, Defendant Cannot Turn Around and Call It Forged—Contradictory Stand at Advanced Trial Stage Impermissible: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Amendment Plea Dismissed Employee Has No Right to Leave Encashment Under Statutory Rules: Punjab and Haryana High Court Section 13 of Gambling Act Is Cognizable — Magistrate Can Take Cognizance on Police Report: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Surveyor’s Report Not Sacrosanct, Arbitral Tribunal Has Jurisdiction to Apply Mind Independently: Bombay High Court Dismisses Insurer’s Challenge to Award in Fire Damage Dispute Anti-Suit Injunction in Matrimonial Dispute Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Refuses to Stall UK Divorce Proceedings Filed by Wife Res Ipsa Loquitur Not a Substitute for Proof of Negligence: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Fatal Road Accident Case NSA Detention Doesn’t Bar Framing of Charges If Prima Facie Evidence Exists: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Charges in Ajnala Police Station Violence Case Continued Contractual Service Despite Sanctioned Posts Is Unfair Labour Practice: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of ECG Technicians After 15 Years Will Duly Proved Even If Witnesses Forget Details After Eight Years: Madras High Court Validates Bequest, Sets Aside Partition Decree Writ Petition Not Maintainable Where Commercial Appeal Remedy Exists: Karnataka High Court Dismisses Petition, Permits Conversion Under Commercial Courts Act Circumstantial Evidence Must Be Cogent, But Caste-Based Offences Demand Specific Intent: Supreme Court Draws Line Between Heinous Crimes and Caste Atrocities Court Must Step into Testator’s Shoes, Not Substitute His Intent: Supreme Court Upholds Will Excluding One Daughter Production of Arbitration Clause is Enough - Not Conduct Mini-Trials on Capacity or Consortium Structure: Supreme Court Title to Property Must Be Proven by Evidence, Not Just Claimed by Deed: Supreme Court Strikes Down Injunction Order Rejecting Police Investigation Is Not Interlocutory Where It Affects Complainant’s Right to Fair Probe in Murder Case: Madhya Pradesh High Court Restores Revision in 156(3) Application Rejection Conviction Cannot Rest On Contradictions, Hostility And Conjecture: Supreme Court Acquits Seven Accused In 2010 Village Murder Power to Lower NEET Percentile Lies Only With Centre - States Can’t Dilute NEET by Administrative Letters: Supreme Court Imposed 10 Crore Cost On Private Dental College

Prosecution Fails to Prove Complicity of Accused Due to Lack of Direct Evidence; Acquitted Under Section 27A for Insufficient Evidence of Financing - Calcutta High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has acquitted Login Das while maintaining the conviction of Narayan Yadav under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act but setting aside his conviction under Section 27A.

The case primarily revolved around the interpretation and application of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, particularly Sections 21(c) and 27A, dealing with possession and financing of illegal narcotics trade.

The appellants, Narayan Yadav and Login Das, were convicted for offences under Sections 21(c) and 27A of the NDPS Act. The case involved the recovery of phensedyl cough syrup from Yadav and alleged financing of the illegal narcotics trade.

 

 

Detailed Court Assessment:

 

 

Recovery from Narayan Yadav: The Court observed that the recovery of narcotics from Narayan Yadav's residence was duly established. Despite no independent witnesses, the consistency in official witnesses' testimonies and corroborative documentary evidence were deemed sufficient.

Compliance with Procedural Aspects: The Court noted that compliance with Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act was not required due to the presence of gazetted officers during the raid. The chain of custody and compliance with Section 52A were adequately maintained, as evidenced by the certification of the seized narcotics by the Judicial Magistrate.

 

Absence of Direct Evidence Against Login Das: The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove Login Das's complicity due to the lack of direct evidence. The reliance on a seizure list from another case was insufficient to establish his involvement in the narcotics trade, leading to his acquittal.

Conviction under Section 21(c) and Acquittal under Section 27A for Narayan Yadav: While Yadav's conviction under Section 21(c) was upheld due to the established recovery of narcotics, his conviction under Section 27A was set aside due to insufficient evidence of his involvement in financing illegal trade.

Decision: The Court allowed the appeal CRA 97 of 2020, acquitting Login Das, and partly allowed the appeal CRA 236 of 2020, maintaining Narayan Yadav's conviction under Section 21(c) but acquitting him under Section 27A.

 Date of Decision: 05.04.2024.

Login Das @ Lagin Rabi Das Vs. The State of West Bengal and Narayan Yadav @ Jadab Vs. The State of West Bengal,

Latest Legal News