2005 (8) TMI 716 - SC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act regarding personal search.
2. Compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act.
3. Admissibility of evidence obtained during a search.
4. Validity of the judgment and order of the High Court.

Interpretation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act regarding personal search:
The case involved an appeal by the State of Rajasthan against a judgment acquitting the respondent of carrying contraband opium. The High Court held that a search of a bag carried on the head of a person amounts to a personal search under Section 50 of the NDPS Act. However, the Supreme Court referred to a previous judgment to define "person" as a human being with appropriate coverings and clothing, excluding articles like bags or containers. Therefore, the Court concluded that the provisions of Section 50 were not applicable in this case, overturning the High Court's decision.

Compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act:
The High Court found that there was no proper compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act in the search conducted in this case. It held that the respondent was entitled to an acquittal due to the partial option given to him during the search. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, stating that the search did not fall under the definition of a personal search as per the Act, and hence, there was no requirement for strict compliance with Section 50. The Court set aside the High Court's decision and upheld the trial court's judgment.

Admissibility of evidence obtained during a search:
The appellant argued that the respondent should be deemed under arrest when questioned by the police and that any confession made should not be used against him. The Court rejected this argument, stating that there was no evidence of the respondent being compelled to confess. The Court emphasized that compelling a person to be searched does not amount to a confession. Therefore, the evidence obtained during the search was admissible, and there was no valid reason to support the High Court's judgment of acquittal.

Validity of the judgment and order of the High Court:
The Supreme Court concluded by setting aside the High Court's judgment and restoring the judgment of the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Chittorgarh, dated May 5, 2000. The respondent was ordered to be taken into custody to serve the remainder of the sentence. The appeal by the State of Rajasthan was allowed, overturning the High Court's decision and upholding the conviction of the respondent for carrying contraband opium.