Gazetted Officer Who Is Part Of Raid Is Not 'Independent', Personal Search Conducted By Him Does Not Constitute Compliance Of S.50 NDPS Act: Calcutta HC, Case Title: Ali Hossain Sk. "Inordinate Delay In Trial, Prolonged Judicial Custody": Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Man Incarcerated For Almost 8 Yrs In NDPS Case. 11:30 AM EDT, Mon May 17, 2021. The Tripura High Court has made it clear that Section 63 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not bar the owner of a vehicle seized in raid to make an application seeking interim custody/ bail of his vehicle after expiry of thirty days from the date of seizure. The appeal was dismissed, and Ms. Green was awarded costs in the amount of $5,000. The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to an accused under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act as it noted that the constables of the Railway Police Force, who witnessed the alleged recovery, search, and seizure, cannot be said to be independent witnesses. 68. Probable cause is the final reason that an officer could search a person or their property. 70. Highlighting the importance of a legitimate recovery procedure, the Court averred, "While a strict law is necessary to control organized crime like drug trafficking and protect the youth from the menace of drug abuse, its draconian provisions are sometimes misused by investigating agency leading to false implication and prolonged unjustified detention of individuals. 29. The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently denied bail to a man, arraigned as an accused in a FIR under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and arrested, merely on the basis of a disclosure statement made by a co-accused. "Issues Of Undertrials Standing Stubborn Against Face Of Democracy": Rajasthan HC Grants Bail To NDPS Accused In Jail For 6 Yrs. Defense Attorney David Fischer successfully convinced Judge Kara K. Ueda in his motion to suppress the search and seizure because the stop itself for "illegal" tinted windows" was not legal and the subsequent search was not lawful because of the illegal stop and because the "pat search" was not lawful. The Supreme Court on Monday wiped away a lower court decision that held that law enforcement could enter a Rhode Island mans home and seize his firearms without a warrant after his wife expressed fear that he might harm himself. Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a regular bail plea in an FIR registered under the provisions of NDPS Act, held that the provisions of Section 42 of the Act, are applicable to search of buildings, conveyance, and, enclosed space, upon receipt of prior information by the investigating officer concerned when searches, are conducted in the interregnum inter-se sunset, and, sunrise. 51. Western District of Washington. The High Court noted that till date, out of a total of 14 witnesses only two witnesses have been examined, and as such there is no probability of the trial being concluded in the near future. While granting bail to the petitioner, who was booked under the NDPS Act and detained for being found from a vehicle which carried ganja, a Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi placed heavy reliance on the observations made in Avtar Singh & Ors. Here is a Digest on decisions relating to Narcotic Drugs and . NDPS ACT | Minor Discrepancy In Sample's Weight Sent To Forensic Lab Can't Shake Roots Of Prosecution's Case: Allahabad High Court, Case title - Chhotey Lal v. U.O.I. The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently granted regular bail to an accused under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, noting that the rigours of bail stipulated under Section 37 thereof do not apply in case the recovery is not of commercial quantity contraband. Rigours Of Section 37 NDPS Act Not Applicable In Cases Where Collection Of Contraband Sample Itself Faulty: Delhi High Court, Title: LAXMAN THAKUR v. STATE (GOVT. The chemical analyser wrote to the Anti-Terrorism Squad earlier this year and clarified that no contraband was found in the items seized from the Nigerian in the year 2020, only pain killers and caffeine. NDPS Act | Non-Compliance Of Section 41 No Ground For Granting Bail, Rigours Of Section 37 Still Have To Be Met : Delhi High Court. S.50 NDPS Act | Personal Search Conducted In Presence Of ACP Not Bad Merely Because He Belongs To Police Dept: Karnataka High Court, Case Title: Joswin Lobo v. State of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition No.6916/2021, The Karnataka High Court has said there is no bar on a police officer, who is a gazetted officer, on carrying out a personal search to draw a mahazar, on an accused/ suspect under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Mohapatra held that the legislative intent is clear and in the light of interpretation of Section 52-A(2) to (4) by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Makhan Chand, (2004) 3 SCC 453; Noor Aga v. State of Punjab, (2008) 16 SCC 417; Union of India v. Jarooparam, (2018) 4 SCC 334, there is no scope for invoking 'mischief rule' to read the word 'Magistrate' in the above provision as 'Special Court'. The Andhra Pradesh High Court observed that mere non-mentioning of exact quantity of ganja in FIR will not render prosecution's case meritless, if the amount obtained from the accused is a commercial quantity. 33. The purpose of this site is to provide information from and about the Judicial Branch of the U.S. Government. 16. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while dismissing a revision petition filed by an accused in relation to a case registered under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, challenging the order of Trial Court wherein his plea for Default Bail was dismissed. NDPS Act | Passing Secret Tip About Illicit Drugs To Gazetted Officer Before Apprehending Accused Not Reason To Doubt Prosecution Story: P&H High Court, Case Title: Jaswinder Singh @ Jass VERSUS State of Punjab. The High Court granted bail to an accused under the NarcoticDrugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, while observing that rigours of bail under Section 37 of the Act does not apply in case of non-commercial quantity and hence, regular bail can be allowed. 28. 57. 61. When Drug Was Recovered On Driver's Body Search, It Can't Be Held That Vehicle Was Used For Conveying Contraband : Kerala High Court, Case Title: Wilson C.C. Rafael Gonzalez, Esq., Cattie & Gonzalez, PLLC On June 10, 2022, the United States Supreme Court published its decision on Gallardo v. @ Ali Hussain Seikh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, The Calcutta High Court observed that a Gazetted Officer who is a member of the raiding party cannot be said to be an independent person and thus a desire expressed by accused persons to be searched by such an officer does not constitute a voluntary relinquishment of the right enshrined under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act. NDPS Act | ChargesheetWithout FSL Report Not Defective, No Ground For Default Bail U/S 167(2) CrPC: Karnataka High Court, Case Title: Sayyad Mohammad @ Nasim V State Of Karnataka Case No: Writ Petition No.5934 Of 2022. reasonable ground for believing that the accused is not guilty of such an offence and that the accused would not commit an offence or is not likely to commit an offence, if granted bail. A Bankruptcy or Magistrate Judge? Justice Anish Dayal observed that the requirements of section 50 being mandatory in nature, are in consonance with the right of an accused to know of his legal rights. "Since the mandatory requirement of Section 50 of the NDPS Act has not been met in the first instance, the recovery itself is under doubt. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that when dealing with a case registered under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the power to grant regular bail under Section 439 CrPC is subject to the conditions laid down in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court said though the authorities cannot ignore statutory rigours of the provisions especially when it causes serious prejudice to the accused, the apex court in Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana has said the provision of Section 41 is a discretionary measure. v. State of Kerala. A single judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh said,"Assistant Commissioner of Police is also a Gazetted OfficerSearch by the officer of the said department is not a bar and no law prescribes that he (suspect/accused) should be subjected to the personal search in the presence of the Gazetted Officer not belonging to the particular department. 50. Justice A. Badharudeen remarked, that it is relevant, rather shocking to note that the Public Prosecutor who was appointed by the State to conduct serious cases of this nature, even not cared at least to read Section 36-A(4) and its proviso, before filing the report of the Investigating Officer pressing for extension of detention of the accused beyond the period of 180 days Indubitably, it is held that, the report/petition filed by the Investigating Officer cannot be considered as a report/petition envisaged under Section 36-A(4), since the Investigating Officer has no such right. Delhi High Court Clarifies Controlled Substances Are Not Affected By The Bar To Bail Under Section 37 Of The NDPS Act, Case Name: TINIMO EFERE WOWO Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI. Justice Bibhas Ranjan De observed, "It is axiometic that 'reasonable grounds' means something more than prima facie grounds. The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently laid down that if investigation in illegal possession of commercial quantity of ganja is pending beyond the statutory limit of 180 days by virtue of extension granted under Section 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) well in advance, then default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC cannot be granted. The provision stipulates that if it is not possible to complete the investigation within 180 days, the Special Court may extend the said period up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor indicating the progress of the investigation and the specific reasons for detention beyond 180 days. Prosecution in such cases primarily relies on the evidence of official witnesses particularly seizing officers to prove lawful recovery of contraband. 1994 SC 2623 and various other decisions, have answered on five points relating to release of an accused in terms of Section 36-A(4) of the N.D.P.S. [NDPS Act] Investigating Officer's Request For Extension Of Time Not Substitute For Report Of Public Prosecutor: Madras High Court Reiterates, Case Title: Shakil Ahamed v The Superintendent of Customs. on 22.11.2021. 20. The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal granted bail to one Om Prakash Verma who claimed before the Court that the procedure laid down in the Standing Order to be followed while conducting seizure of the contraband was not followed in the instant case. Highly Unbelievable One Would Keep Identity Proof In Bag Along With Contraband: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To NDPS Accused, Case Title: Ankit Ashok Nisar & Ors v. State of Himachal Pradesh. Status Conference. 18 Jan 2023 5:17 AM GMT. The Karnataka High Court while rejecting a bail application by an accused charged under provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (NDPS) has reiterated that merely because the chemical analysis report of the contraband seized is not received within 15 days, it is not a ground to release the accused on bail. 'Temple From Which Ganja Was Recovered Was Not In His Exclusive Possession': Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Priest In NDPS Case, Case Title: Shantaram B. Dhoble v. State of Maharashtra. 19. 47. ", 34. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh was hearing the regular bail application filed by Mahesh, who was allegedly found to be in possession of 20 grams of Ecstasy (commercial quantity). The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal denied bail to the two Accused [Chhotey Lal and Kavinder Kumar] booked under. Search and Seizure Latest Search New York Troopers' Union Offices Searched by State Police Investigators A union lawyer said the search was part of an inquiry focused on "uncovering past. ", 24. 2. Dorm rooms While college students do ", 10. Most of the cases registered under the N.D.P.S. The High Court has said that merely on the ground that the vehicle is liable to confiscation under Section 60 of the NDPS Act, it cannot be held that once the vehicle is seized for the commission of offence under the NDPS Act, interim custody cannot be granted. 18 and 25 of NDPS Act. 2,52,15,350 was found. Calcutta HC Grants Default Bail To Accused For Non-Compliance Of Notice Of Application For Extension Of Time U/S 36A(4) NDPS Act, Case Title: Naimuddin Laskar @ Naim v. The State of West Bengal. Interim Custody Of Conveyance/Vehicle Seized Under NDPS Act Can Be Granted U/S 451 & 457 CrPC: Allahabad High Court, Case title - Rajdhari Yadav v. State of U.P. 17. S.36A(4) NDPS Act | Apart From Reasons To Detain Accused Beyond Statutory Period, Prosecutor's Report Must Disclose Progress Of Investigation: Kerala HC, Case Title: Ubaid A.M. v. State of Kerala. Sections 36-A to 36-C which specify the powers of the Special Judge do not expressly state that such Special Judge can exercise the powers of the Magistrate for the purposes of Section 52-A(2) to (4) of the Act. along with a connected matter. NDPS | Extension Beyond Statutory Period In Submitting Chargesheet Cannot Be Granted Without Giving Hearing To Accused: Orissa High Court, Case Title: Biru Singh v. State of Odisha. The Division Bench comprising Justices Debangsu Basak and Md. The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that merely because the FSL report did not accompany the charge sheet at the time of its presentation, it cannot be said that the charge sheet was incomplete or defective. The Bench comprising Justice Umesh A. Trivedi was hearing an application under Section 439 for offences under Sections 8(c),22(c), and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985. Rigors Of S.37 NDPS Act Can Be Relaxed In Cases Involving Commercial Quantity If There Is Delay In Conclusion Of Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court, Case Title : Ghanso @ Kalo v. State of Punjab. The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused in an NDPS case, observing that 'Khad' cannot be solely interpreted to mean drugs or contraband. The court further said since the "fountainhead of the recovery" itself is missing, "I am of the view that no reliance can be placed on the recovery made from the applicant". 65. Observing that despite Supreme Court guidelines, and legal and executive reforms, there is no significant improvement in the state of the under-trials, the Rajasthan High Court recently granted bail to an NDPS accused in view of his over 6 years' incarceration as an under-trial. P. C read with Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act", Justice Sanjay Dhar explained. As readers may know, S.L. 55. The petitioner was found to be in illegal possession of 16 kgs of Ganja that he was apprehended by the police and the contraband was seized from his possession. The Delhi High Court has said that the question whether non-compliance of Section 41 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in the process of arrest, search and seizure vitiates the trial is to be seen at the stage of trial and cannot have any bearing on grant of bail. United States of America v. City of Seattle. The High Court set aside the orders passed by a Sessions-cum-Special Court which granted extension to submit chargesheet without providing hearing to accused and not even releasing him when he was entitled for 'default bail'. The facts of the case were that brown sugar packaged in aplastic bag was retrieved from the Respondent, herein. 43. Section 37 states that bail should not be granted to an accused unless the accused is able to satisfy twin conditions i.e. After the ambulance left, they seized his weapons. Justice Sandeep Shinde while dealing with the bail application observed that prima facie, the temple was not in exclusive possession of the priest. Your effort and contribution in providing this feedback is much Granting bail to a Nigerian in a drugs case after nearly four years of custody, the Delhi High Court has said that any recovery made without compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act "itself cannot be sustained" and no reliance can be placed on it. The Delhi High Court has observed that refusal by an accused to get a search conducted before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate under section 50 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 would be vitiated if he misunderstands, misinterprets or even due to miscommunication of the questions put to him. The Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed thus as it and that this is the job of the Government to take decisions over including a particular drug in the list of 'manufactured drugs' or 'psychotropic substances' under the NDPS Act. An officer who wants to search will typically need either permission or a warrant. Emphasising that procedure under Section 50 of the NDPS Act needs to be followed in a just and proper manner, the GujaratHigh Court has upheld the order of the trial court in acquitting the Respondent accused of offences under Sections 8(C), 20(B), 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act. NDPS Act | 'Spot' Means Place Where Search Is Conducted & Recovery Is Made, Not Where Suspected Vehicle Or Person Is Intercepted: Madhya Pradesh HC, Case Title: Kamruddin v. Union of India, with connected matters.
Teddy Gentry Parents, How Many Countries Use Celsius, San Carlos Cathedral Wedding, Rome Airport Covid Test Appointment, Celebrities Living In Canyon Lake, Ca, Cote Brasserie Nutritional Information,