Mandatory Section 42 compliance under the NDPS Act: total failure to record and report prior information vitiates search and recovery.

Non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act was treated as fatal where prior information received by the empowered officer was not reduced into writing and forthwith communicated to the superior officer. The court held that the officer had sufficient time to comply, and the facts did not justify treating the searches as separate so as to avoid the statutory mandate. Because the requirements for recording and reporting prior information were totally not met, the search and seizure were vitiated and the conviction based on the recovery could not stand, leading to acquittal.

---

---

Issues: Whether non-compliance with the mandatory requirements governing recording and communication of prior information under the NDPS Act vitiated the search and seizure, and consequently the conviction based on the recovered contraband.

Analysis: The search at the courier premises was founded on prior information received by the empowered officer, while the later search at the other courier office was treated by the trial court as one based on information discovered during the first search. The governing law on Section 42 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 required the empowered officer to reduce such information into writing and forthwith communicate it to the superior officer, subject only to limited flexibility in genuine emergency situations. The judgment held that the facts showed total non-compliance, not merely delayed or substantial compliance. The officer had received the information in sufficient time to record it, and there was no lawful basis to segregate the two searches so as to avoid the statutory mandate.

Conclusion: The non-compliance with Section 42 was held to be fatal. The search and seizure were vitiated, the conviction could not stand, and the accused were entitled to acquittal.

Final Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were set aside and the accused were acquitted, while the State's challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Total non-compliance with the mandatory requirements for recording prior information and reporting it to the superior officer under the NDPS Act vitiates the search, seizure, and the prosecution founded on such recovery.

---