Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Serious Doubt About Prosecution’s Case When Samples Not Taken in Front of Magistrate: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in NDPS Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Calcutta High Court granted bail to the petitioner, Sah Jamal, charged under Section 21© of the NDPS Act. The Court focused on procedural violations in the handling of seized samples, crucial under the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling, and Disposal) Rules, 2022.

Facts and Issues of the Judgment: The petitioner, in custody since 24-05-2023, filed for bail, alleging wrongful implication and highlighting non-compliance with the procedural requirements in handling and sending samples to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL). The core issue revolved around the samples not being taken in front of a Magistrate and discrepancies in sample identification, which the petitioner argued led to a violation of Section 52A of the NDPS Act.

Violation of Section 52A of the NDPS Act: The Court observed that the samples marked as A1 were sent to the CFSL without being taken in the presence of a Magistrate, constituting a violation of Section 52A.

Reference to Supreme Court Precedent: The petitioner’s advocate cited the case of Samarjit Singh v. State of Punjab, emphasizing the importance of proper procedures for sample seizure and handling as established in Mohonlal’s case. The Court aligned with this precedent, noting similar procedural irregularities in the current case.

Impact of Procedural Irregularities: The Court noted, “the act of drawing samples at the time of seizure, which often occurs in the absence of the Magistrate, is not in conformity with the law.” This misstep cast a serious doubt on the prosecution’s case, as the Supreme Court had observed in the Samarjit Singh case.

Overcoming the Rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act: The Court concluded that the petitioner successfully overcame the stringent conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which pertains to bail for offences under the Act.

Decision of Judgment: The Court granted bail to the petitioner, Sah Jamal, subject to two sureties of Rs. 10,000 each, one being local. The conditions also included regular attendance before the investigating officer and the court.

Date of Decision: 09/04/2024.

Sah Jamal v. The State of West Bengal,

 

Latest Legal News