Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance of Section 50 — Search of Bag Not Covered Under Mandatory Procedure. The court held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to personal search, not to search of a bag, and thus the conviction was set aside.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 78
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellants, Rehanabi Sheikh Atiq and Sheikh Sohel Sheikh Atiq, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special (NDPS) Case 2/2012 for an offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.25,000 each. The prosecution case was that Police Inspector Sharif Khan of Ashti Police Station received secret information that a lady and a youth were possessing a military green bag containing ganja at Shirkutni Bus Stop. The police raided the spot, gave notice under Section 50(1) of the NDPS Act, and upon search, recovered ganja from the bag. The appellants challenged their conviction on the ground of non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. The court examined the provision and noted that Section 50 applies only to the search of a person and not to the search of a bag or container carried by a person. Since the recovery was from a bag, the mandatory procedure under Section 50 was not attracted. The court held that the conviction was illegal and set aside the judgment of the trial court, acquitting the appellants. The court did not examine other grounds of challenge as the appeal was allowed on this short ground.

Headnote

A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 50 - Search of Person - Applicability - Section 50 applies only to search of a person and not to search of a bag or container carried by a person - The court held that the search of a military green bag containing ganja was not a personal search, and therefore, the requirement of Section 50 was not attracted - The conviction was set aside on the ground that the search was of a bag and not of the person (Paras 3-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the mandatory procedure under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was complied with when the search was of a bag and not of the person?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants acquitted. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.

Law Points

  • Section 50 NDPS Act applies only to personal search
  • not to search of bag or container
  • Section 50 NDPS Act mandatory for personal search
  • non-compliance of Section 50 vitiates conviction only if search is of person
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (06) 164

Criminal Appeal No.591 of 2018

2019-06-27

Rohit B. Deo, J.

Shri A. Bhangde for appellants, Shri N.B. Jawade, Addl.P.P. for respondent

Rehanabi Sheikh Atiq and Sheikh Sohel Sheikh Atiq

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction under NDPS Act

Remedy Sought

Acquittal by setting aside conviction and sentence

Filing Reason

Non-compliance of mandatory procedure under Section 50 of NDPS Act

Previous Decisions

Conviction by Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special (NDPS) Case 2/2012 on 30-08-2018

Issues

Whether the mandatory procedure under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was complied with?

Submissions/Arguments

Counsel for appellants argued that the judgment of conviction is illegal due to non-compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act. The court noted that Section 50 applies only to search of person, not to search of bag.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to the search of a person and not to the search of a bag or container carried by a person. Therefore, non-compliance of Section 50 does not vitiate the conviction when the recovery is from a bag.

Judgment Excerpts

Section 50 of the NDPS Act reads thus : ... The search was carried out in the presence of the panchas and ganja was found in the green military bag. The court held that the search of a bag is not a personal search and Section 50 is not attracted.

Procedural History

The appellants were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special (NDPS) Case 2/2012 on 30-08-2018. They appealed to the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, which allowed the appeal on 27-06-2019.

Acts & Sections

  • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: 20(b)(ii)(B), 50
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance of Section 50 — Search of Bag Not Covered Under Mandatory Procedure. The court held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act applies only to personal search, not to search of a bag, and th...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes MHADA Order Refusing Commencement Certificate Based on Ministerial Assurance. Ministerial Assurance Cannot Override Statutory Provisions Under Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976.