FIRST LAW

The Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 42 and 50 - N o secret information was received - Hence there was no question of compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act followed by Section 50 of the Act - Only as per the provisions under Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. the search was carried out - The provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act are applicable to the personal search and not the search of the car.

Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21 (c) -  Public Witnesses - the basis, therefor, is that public witnesses rarely prefer to be embroiled in a criminal investigation. If, however, the case of the prosecution is that such “co-operative” public witnesses were available, and that they had been invited to, and involved in, the investigations, the failure, on the part of the prosecution, to produce them as witnesses, necessarily dents its case, and dents it badly.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (Kerala) - S. 3 - Power to make orders for detaining Known Goondas and Known Rowdies - four cases regarding the involvement of the detenu are in small quantity of contraband narcotics, whereas there is involved a large quantity in the case in which he had been acquitted - The fact that the crimes pending against the detenu were only of small quantity might have persuaded the government to release the detenu - the detention order is not sustainable, since the representation by the detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and under Section 7(2) of KAPPA Act has not been given real and proper consideration by the Government.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – S. 50 - Conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 18 - A  fair investigation, which is but the very foundation of fair trial, necessarily postulates that the informant and the investigator must not be the same person. Justice must not only be done, but must appear to be done also. Any possibility of bias or a predetermined conclusion has to be excluded. This requirement is all the more imperative in laws carrying a reverse burden of proof.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 18 - For proving the offence under the NDPS Act, it is necessary for the prosecution to establish that the quantity of the contraband goods allegedly seized from the possession of the accused and the best evidence would be the court records as to the production of the contraband before the Magistrate and deposit of the same before the Malkhana or the document showing destruction of the contraband.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -  Ss. 21(c) r/w. 29 - C onfessional statement of a co-accused cannot by itself be taken as a substantive piece of evidence against another co-accused and can at best be used or utilized in order to lend assurance to the Court - In the absence of any substantive evidence it would be inappropriate to base the conviction of the accused purely on the statements of co-accused.  

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -  S. 50 -    It is mandatory for the prosecution to prove that the search and recovery was made from the accused in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -  S. 52A -  Disposal of seized narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances -  Omission on the part of the prosecution to produce the bulk quantity of seized opium would create a doubt in the mind of Court on the genuineness of the samples drawn and marked from the allegedly seized contraband - the same had been destroyed, cannot be accepted as it is not clear that on what authority it was done - Law requires that such an authority must flow from an order passed by the Magistrate.