Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 18(b) -- Offence u/ss 8 & 18(b) of the Act - Delay of one year in producing seized sample in Court - Coupled with this the signature on the seal being illegible creates a serious doubt with regard to the prosecution case...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 18(b) -- Offence u/ss 8 & 18(b) of the Act - Delay of one year in producing seized sample in Court - Signature on seal illegible - In the Malkhana register there is an entry with regard to the deposit of seized sample but entry dealing with exit from the Malkhana for taking it to Court is blank - Not..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 18(b) -- Offence u/ss 8 & 18(b) of the Act - There is hardly any difference between non production of sample in Court and production of sample doubtful in its identity - In both the cases, it becomes doubtful if FSL report is with regard to the very sample seized from an accused...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 8, 18(b) -- Offence u/ss 8 & 18(b) of the Act - Doubtful identity of sample seized and that produced in Court - FSL report loses much of its significance and accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 50(4) -- Recovery of 10 gms smack - Personal search of female accused - Lady constable conducted personal search of accused - However, said witness was never examined in Court, as she was given up by public prosecutor - Accused was thus, denied valuable right to cross-examine such witness - Prosecution failed to..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21 -- Recovery of 10 gms smack - Search and seizure - Mentioning of complete details of FIR before ruqa was sent to police station, raises suspicion about recovery - Case of prosecution is thus, doubtful - Accused acquitted...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 21 -- Recovery of 10 gms smack - False implication - Call details of accused is discarded by prosecution, which was proved by defence witness which shows that accused prior to her arrest had received phone calls from police officials which primarily shows that she was sought to be interrogated in a false..........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 42(2) -- Recovery of 18 kg Ganja - Secret information though reduced into writing but same was not sent to two superior officers as per S.42(2) of the Act - Mandatory provision of S.42(2) of the Act not complied with - Accused acquitted...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 57 -- Recovery of 18 kg Ganja - Search and seizure - Officer-in-charge failed to inform his superior officials regarding search and seizure within 72 hours of recovery - Provision of S.57 of the Act not complied with...........
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 20, 22 -- Recovery of 18 kg Ganja - No Malkhana register produced to substantiate seized ganja was deposited in Malkhana - Though ganja was produced in Court but none of packet is found sealed - More so, though with regard to bag an explanation is given that it is destroyed by rat but did not have reference of..........
