Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21, 22 -- Recovery of 430 gms heroin - Sample - Difference in weight of sample drawn and that examined by chemical examiner - Sample drawn 5 gms. each from two packets found by chemical examiner 22 gms. each with polythene cover and 19 gms. each without polythene cover - Variation of weight not explained by..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21, 22 -- Recovery of 430 gms heroin - Search and seizure - Testimony of official witnesses regarding search and seizure not supported by independent witnesses as they declared hostile - Even some of official witnesses failed to identify the accused during trial - Such lack of corroboration from independent..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21, 22 -- Recovery of 430 gms heroin - Manner of conducting trial - Charges were framed referring to contraband as heroin although chemical examiner's report showed that samples contained codeine and morphine - More so, charges as well as conviction alternatively recorded u/s 22 of the Act, which refers to..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21, 22 -- Recovery of 430 gms heroin - Search and seizure - Independent witnesses not supported the seizure and drawing of samples from such seized articles in their presence - They merely stated that they were made to sign on blank papers by police personnel - Sanctity with regard to seizure, labeling and chain..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 25 -- Recovery of 6.600 kg poppy straw - Accused `K' being registered owner himself used vehicle for transportation of contraband - Charge u/ss 8, 25 of the Act ex-facie untenable against accused `K', as said offence is made out only if registered owner permitted his vehicle to be used by any other person for..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 15(c), 15(b) -- Nature of offence - Recovery of 6.600 kg. poppy straw - Seizure officer or I.O did not follow procedure of S.52-A of NDPS Act - Evidence of seizure officer cannot be accepted for the entire seized contraband i.e 18 quintals of poppy straw, as prosecution did not give any primary evidence of..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 18, 20, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 389 -- Bail during pendency of appeal - Recovery of 1 kg charas and 8 kg Ganja - Commercial quantity - Sudden arrest - Mandatory provisions of NDPS Act duly followed in the case - No lacunae found in the guilt of accused - Accused already completed half of his..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 42 -- Recovery of 30 bags of poppy husk - Secret information - PW8, immediately on receipt of secret information sent V.T message to DSP and raid was conducted after DSP arrived at bus-stand - Recovery effected in presence of Gazetted Officer, which satisfies the provision of S.42 of the Act - Accused rightly..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 50 -- Recovery of 250 gms brown sugar - Non-compliance of mandatory provision of S.50 of the Act - Seizure officer apprised accused that he had a right of being searched before nearest Magistrate, competent gazetted officer or by seizure officer SHO himself - Offering third option that accused can be searched by..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 389, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 37, 22(C) -- Bail during pendency of appeal - Conviction under NDPS Act - Recovery of 1.850 Kgs diazepam/intoxicating powder - Commercial quantity - Nature of offence is extremely serious because drugs like diazepam are extremely injurious to public at large -..........
