Search safeguard compliance and witness credibility upheld in narcotic seizure despite departmental association of a mahazar witness.

Search and seizure under the narcotic law were treated as valid where a Superintendent of Customs was duly empowered by notification to exercise search powers and the search of a female accused was conducted by a female witness, satisfying the statutory safeguard for women. The challenge based on non-compliance with search requirements therefore failed. The credibility of mahazar witnesses was also upheld because one witness's departmental connection, without material contradiction or proof of false implication, was insufficient to reject their evidence; the trial court's appreciation of testimony was left undisturbed. The conviction was affirmed on that basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the search and seizure were vitiated for non-compliance with the safeguards governing search of a person under the narcotic law; (ii) whether the testimony of the mahazar witnesses was liable to be rejected as unreliable.

Issue (i): whether the search and seizure were vitiated for non-compliance with the safeguards governing search of a person under the narcotic law

Analysis: The officer who intercepted the accused was a Superintendent of Customs and had been empowered by the Central Government notification issued under the enabling provision to exercise the powers of search. The search was conducted by a female witness in respect of a female accused, which satisfied the statutory requirement concerning search of women. In these circumstances, the challenge based on violation of the search safeguards was not accepted.

Conclusion: The search was held to be lawful and the objection based on non-compliance with the search safeguard failed.

Issue (ii): whether the testimony of the mahazar witnesses was liable to be rejected as unreliable

Analysis: The mere fact that one of the witnesses was a sweeper in the Customs Department did not, by itself, justify rejection of her evidence. No material contradiction or circumstance was elicited to show false implication or to discredit the independent witnesses. The trial court had found their evidence trustworthy after seeing them, and no reason was found to interfere with that appreciation of evidence.

Conclusion: The evidence of the mahazar witnesses was accepted and the attack on their credibility failed.

Final Conclusion: The conviction was affirmed and the criminal appeal was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: When a gazetted customs officer is duly empowered under the narcotic law by notification, a search conducted by him or under his authority is valid, and the testimony of seizure witnesses cannot be discarded merely because of their departmental association in the absence of material grounds to doubt their credibility.

---