Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the safeguards under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 apply to the search of a bag, attachi, briefcase or similar container carried by the accused.
Analysis: The statutory expression "search any person" was construed according to its plain meaning in the context of the Act. A bag or similar container was held not to be part of the human body and therefore not a "person" within Section 50. The Court distinguished personal search, where the body or clothing of the accused is searched, from search of baggage merely carried by the accused. The Constitution Bench ruling on Section 50 was understood to confine the provision to search of a person, and earlier observations suggesting a broader reach were treated as not laying down the governing rule. On that basis, non-compliance with Section 50 could not invalidate search and recovery from baggage carried by the accused.
Conclusion: Section 50 was held inapplicable to the search of a bag or attachi carried by the accused, and not every search of a container in a person's possession requires compliance with the safeguards for personal search.
Final Conclusion: The acquittal could not be sustained on the ground of breach of Section 50 alone, and both matters were sent back for fresh consideration on merits.