TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the search and seizure from the appellant complied with the requirements of Section 42 and Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and whether the conviction under Section 21 of that Act was sustainable.
Analysis: The appellant's challenge was confined to alleged non-compliance with the statutory safeguards governing search. The search was conducted by a gazetted officer who was himself part of the raiding party, and on the facts found by the courts below, compliance with Section 42 was not required in the manner suggested by the appellant. As regards Section 50, the appellant was given a written option to be searched before a Magistrate or a gazetted officer and consented to be searched in the presence of the accompanying gazetted officer. The seizure list and surrounding evidence also supported recovery of heroin from the appellant's possession, and the record disclosed no other sustainable ground of challenge.
Conclusion: The statutory safeguards were held to have been complied with, and the conviction and sentence under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 were upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the search is conducted by a gazetted officer who is himself part of the raiding party, Section 42 is not attracted in the manner urged, and a written offer with consent satisfies Section 50.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
