Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 8,21 -- Sample - Safe custody of sample must be proved beyond reasonable doubt - Constable took the sample to FSL which could not be handed over to FSL and sample was brought back in the evening and deposited in the Malkhana and was again taken to FSL on the next day - It was imperative that its re-entry should have been reflected in the Malkhana register - Neither the Malkhana Register shows that the sample was brought back nor does the Rojnamcha Register shows hat sample was brought back - Held, safe custody of sample has not been established by prosecution. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0696 : 2012 (3) WESTERN LAW CASES 0481 : 2013 (2) RAJASTHAN LAW WEEKLY 0986)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 8,21 -- Recovery of smack - FSL report absolutely silent as to the percentage of the Diacetyl morphine - Thus Court does not know whether a small quantity, or less than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity, or commercial quantity was recovered - Benefit of doubt goes to accused. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0696 : 2012 (3) WESTERN LAW CASES 0481 : 2013 (2) RAJASTHAN LAW WEEKLY 0986)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Poppy husk - Recovery of 175 Kg. in five plastic bags lying in a car - Recovery made at noon time - Non joining of independent witness - IO admitted in cross examination that he did not try to join any independent witness - Narma crop was shown in the fields nearby and it can very well be presumed that farmers were present in their respective fields to protect their crops - Non joining of any independent witness creates serious doubts on the veracity of the prosecution case - Accused acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0658 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0671 : 2012 (4) CRIMES 0046)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Recovery of poppy husk - Missing links - Lapses in investigation in establishing ownership of car from which alleged contraband recovered and sources from where appellant procured alleged contraband - Missing link in prosecution case by itself not sufficient to seek acquittal - However, if cumulative effect of lapses and short-comings in investigation adjudged, then, issue of missing links can be accounted in favour of appellant - Appellant acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0658 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0671 : 2012 (4) CRIMES 0046)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Delay of four days in sending sample for analysis - Sample received by Laboratory with seals intact and tallying with the specimen seals - No benefit on account of delay in sending sample for analysis can be extended to accused. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0658 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0671 : 2012 (4) CRIMES 0046)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Conscious possession - Recovery of 60 bags of poppy husk from canter - Conviction - Sustainability - Appellant apprehended at the spot whereas other co-accused managed to run away - Appellant was driving canter in question on day of recovery - Appellant pleaded that he was ignorant of fact that canter in question was loaded with poppy husk - Plea liable to be disbelieved as appellant apprehended at the spot driving canter loaded with 60 bags of poppy husk - Presumption arises that he was in conscious possession of contraband - Appellant produced before Magistrate after recovery along with case property - Appellant tried to shift onus on his co-accused whereas their presence at the spot is doubtful - Conviction upheld. (2012 (3) CRIMES 0687 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0674 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0667)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Recovery of 60 bags of poppy husk from canter - Presence of appellant at the spot doubtful - Appellant suffering from diabetes mellitus and fracture on his right leg and plastered for three weeks - Even in Court, appellant appeared on wheel chair as is evident from cross examination of PW6 - Not possible for appellant to have managed to run away from the spot in presence of six police officials - Fact that appellant might have been falsely involved in the case cannot be ruled out - Appellant acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMES 0687 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0674 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0667)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Recovery of 60 bags of poppy husk from canter - Appellant owner of canter in question - Presence of appellant at the spot doubtful - DW4 concluded in his inquiry that appellant is innocent as he was present with his father for getting him treated qua fracture suffered by him o the day of recovery - Possibility of appellant falsely involved in case being owner of canter cannot be ruled out - Appellant acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMES 0687 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0674 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0667)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Recovery of 60 bags of poppy husk from canter - Presence of appellant at the spot doubtful - Appellant only described as Chacha in ruqa - Appellant not apprehended at the spot although police party consisted of six police officials - Possibility that appellant might have been falsely involved in case cannot be ruled out - Appellant acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMES 0687 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0674 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0667)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, Section 3(1)(d), Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Accused convicted u/s 15 of NDPS Act and sentenced to 10 years RI - Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules 2007, R. 4(1), - Petitioner seeking parole to attend marriage of his nephew - Parole cannot be denied on the ground that accused has not yet completed one years sentence - Emergency parole is granted to the convict to attend various situations over which he has no control i.e. death or fixation of marriage of a relation. (2012 (2) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0775)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 15 -- Poppy husk - Recovery of five bags from a car - Acquittal of co-accused - Extending benefit to the other accused - Acquittal of co-accused as prosecution story was disbelieved that one out of the two accused alighted from the car and ran away - This circumstance by itself throws serious doubts on the veracity of the prosecution case - Appellant acquitted. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0658 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0671 : 2012 (4) CRIMES 0046)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, 35, 54, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20 -- Charas - Recovery - Once the recovery of narcotic stands proved from the accused, the presumption of culpable mental state can be safely drawn as per provision of S.35 of the Act - Accused has failed to account satisfactorily for its possession - Therefore, he is proved to have committed the offence charged in view of S.54 of the Act. (2011 CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL 4654 : 2012 (1) CRIMES 0412 : 2012 (2) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0188)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, 35, 54, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20 -- Charas - Recovery - Evidence of PW1 that recovered stuff was weighed in electronic scale whereas PW2 stated that it was traditional one - However, this question not put to PW11 who in fact weighed the contraband - Held, otherwise also this discrepancy is of no consequence in view of fact of recovery of narcotic from the accused which stands proved. (2011 CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL 4654 : 2012 (1) CRIMES 0412 : 2012 (2) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0188)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, 35, 54, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20 -- Charas - Recovery from accused while travelling in a taxi and was carrying a bag in his lap which contained contraband - Conviction based on testimonies of official witnesses - There is no principle of law that without corroboration by the independent witnesses the testimonies of official witnesses cannot be relied upon - The presumption that person acts honestly applies as much in favour of police personnel as of other person - Testimonies of official witnesses are required to be scrutinized fairly and dispassionately like the statement of other witness in order to find out whether the same inspire confidence and can be safely relied upon. (2011 CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL 4654 : 2012 (1) CRIMES 0412 : 2012 (2) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0188)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20 -- Ganja plant found cultivated by the side of drain of house of appellant - Convicted - Appeal against - No evidence that said drain was private drain of appellant or public drain - Neither any evidence on record that ganja plant seized from exclusive and conscious possession of appellant - Moreover, after seizure of plant, same was not sealed in presence of witnesses - Sample sent to CFL for examination after 1 month and 18 days - Not complied with mandatory provision of S.42(2) of the Act - Conviction unsustainable. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0782)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, 35, 54, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20 -- Charas - Recovery from accused while travelling in a taxi and was carrying a bag in his lap which contained contraband - Plea that entire dicky of taxi was empty and there was no question of carrying bag by accused in his lap - Held, it depends upon the wish and psyche of every person in which way he would like to travel - Point raised is of no consequence. (2011 CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL 4654 : 2012 (1) CRIMES 0412 : 2012 (2) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0188)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20,29 -- Charas - Recovery of 900 grams from a Dhaba - Ownership of Dhaba - Not proved - No licence issued by licensing authority or electric bill produced - Merely to say that Dhaba was leased out to accused is not sufficient - Persons sitting at the counter, at the time of raid, cannot be made liable for the alleged recovery. (2012 (2) CRIMES 0551 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0728 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0370)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20,29 -- Charas - Recovery of 900 grams - Seal after use handed over to PW1 and it was immediately taken thereafter - Possibility of tampering with the sample parcel or the case property cannot be ruled out. (2012 (2) CRIMES 0551 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0728 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0370)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20,29 -- Charas - Recovery of 900 grams - Column No.5 of NCB form tampered by making overwriting showing one sample instead of two samples - What was the purpose and intention behind it - Not spelt out - Accused acquitted. (2012 (2) CRIMES 0551 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0728 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0370)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 20,29 -- Charas - Recovery of 900 grams - Report of Chemical Examiner does not conclude that stuff recovered falls within definition of 'Charas' and that resin was from a cannabis plant - Conviction and sentence set aside. (2012 (2) CRIMES 0551 : 2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0728 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0370)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 21,25,29,61,85, Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Section 3,4,5, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Section 17,18,19,20, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 120B -- Huge recovery of RDX, Heroine, Fuse Wire, Live detonators and fire/timer devices - Bail - Refused - Held, mere mentioning of FIR number on recovery memo cannot be held to be fatal - Preparation of two recovery memos fully explained by state as samples taken two times on direction of DSP - Not a fit case for grant of bail as petitioner involved in cross-border smuggling and in act of destabilizing unity and integrity of nation - Petitioner can certainly influence witnesses during course of trial - Petition dismissed. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0804 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0678)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 22(c) -- Recovery of 56 gms smack and 700 gms of diazempam powder - Accused was not caught on the spot and no recovery of any prohibited contraband is alleged to have been made from his possession - Recovery effected from the house of co-accused - There is no evidence on record that accused was related to co-accused or were dealing with narcotics to any extent of that he was co-owner or co-sharer in the house in question - Moreover, recovered material was neither produced nor proved before trial Court - No infirmity or illegality in the impugned order of acquittal - Acquittal upheld. (2017 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0661)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 50 -- of the Act is mandatory only when contraband is recovered from the personal search of the accused. - Compliance of ,S. 50 (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0658 : 2012 (3) RECENT CRIMINAL REPORTER 0671 : 2012 (4) CRIMES 0046)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, Section 50, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 100 -- Smack - Recovery of 1 Kg. - Recovery made under supervision of SHO but search was made by a Constable - Held, on a conjoint reading of S.50 of NDPS Act and S.100 Cr.P.C. there is no requirement that the authorized person has to personally search the offender. (2012 (3) CRIMINAL COURT CASES 0696 : 2012 (3) WESTERN LAW CASES 0481 : 2013 (2) RAJASTHAN LAW WEEKLY 0986)