Acquittal in NDPS Case: Doubts on Seizure and Storage Procedures.
25 March 2025
Acquittal >> Criminal Law | Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law
The case involved the seizure of 600 kg of dry ganja on June 18, 2010. The seized material was not produced in court until July 3, 2010, remaining in the custody of the investigating officer (PW-3) in his office for 15 days. PW-3 admitted to being unaware of Standing Order No. 1/89.
The Court emphasized that while not every minor breach of the Standing Order would vitiate a conviction, substantial compliance with statutory provisions and laid-down procedures is crucial. Referring to previous judgments in Bharat Ambale vs. State of Chattisgarh and Narcotics Control Bureau vs. Kashif, the Court reiterated that Section 52A read with Standing Order No. 1/89 strengthens the evidentiary framework and that non-compliance requires the prosecution to prove their case isn't affected.
In this instance, the Supreme Court found that the seized contraband was not properly sealed, and its custody by the investigating officer for 15 days in an unsealed state raised serious concerns about tampering or substitution. The Court concluded that the possibility of tampering during this period could not be ruled out and that the prosecution failed to justify the departure from the standing order or prove that such non-compliance did not affect their case.
Section 42, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - 1985
Section 52A, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - 1985
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985