9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Compliance with Section 50 of the Act; Compliance with Section 42(2) of the Act. Analysis: The Respondents were initially convicted under Section 8 read with Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fine. However, the High Court acquitted them based on non-compliance with Section 50 and Section 42(2) of the Act. The Supreme Court noted that Section 50 did not apply as the search and seizure were conducted from a truck, not from the person of the accused. Citing precedent, the Court clarified that search of an article carried by a person is not considered a search of the person under Section 50. Since the search was from a truck, Section 50 did not apply in this case. Regarding Section 42(2) of the Act, the Court emphasized that the search and seizure were conducted on a public carrier at a public place. Referring to a previous judgment, it was established that when a public conveyance is searched in a public place during daytime, the officer is not required to follow the proviso to Section 42 for searches between sunset and sunrise. As the search in this case was conducted during daylight hours, the requirements of Section 42(2) were not applicable. Consequently, the High Court's acquittal was deemed unjustified, and the trial court's conviction of the Respondents was upheld. In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the High Court's acquittal and reinstating the trial court's conviction and sentence against the Respondents. The Respondents were directed to be taken into custody to serve the remaining sentence, with a compliance report to be submitted to the Court within one month.
|
