TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (6) TMI 505
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nment for ten years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- with default stipulation. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: On 20th February, 1990 Pran Nath, Sub Inspector of Special staff, north District, was on patrolling duty along with Ramesh Kumar, Assistant Sub-Inspector, Puran Chand, Head Constable; Raghbir Singh, Head Constable; Ved Parkash Head Constable and other constables. At about 7 a.m., near the petrol pump at Mall Road situated within the bounds of Police Station, Timarpur, a police Informer gave information to Pran Nath, Sub Inspector of the accused's possession of opium. Consequently, a raiding party was organized. Jeet Lal, public witness was also joined in the raiding party besides the above mentioned cops. Thereafter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g 50 grams each were separated from the above said opium weighing 800 grams and 700 grams. Both the samples and the remaining two parcels of the opium were separately packed and sealed with the seals bearing the initials of RKV belonging to Ramesh Kumar Vohra ASI and RCS belonging to the SHO. CFSL form was filled in and both the seals were affixed thereon. The seal of RKV was entrusted with Jeet Lal, public witness, but the SHO retained his seal with him. SHO carried the case property and CFSL form to the police station and deposited the same with the Moharar Malkhana. The case property recovered from the possession of Om Prakash was seized vide recovery memo Ex. PW 1/B, Malvinder's case property, scooter, keys were seized vide recovery mem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dly, the police officer while on patrol duty, received secret information and had organized the raid party. The ACP was also informed and he was a party of the raid party and, therefore, Section 42 has no application. In any case there was no requirement to send any information which in fact had been done. It was for the accused to call for the record relating to the information given to the superior officer. In any event, this is a case which is not only covered by Section 43 IPC but also covered by Section 41 IPC. 5. Learned counsel for the accused supported the order of the High Court. 6. At this juncture it would be relevant to take note of what has been stated by this Court in T. Thomson v. State of Kerala and Another [2002 (9) SCC 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... enclosed place. This power can be exercised freely between sunrise and sunset but between sunset and sunrise if such an officer proposes to enter and search such building, conveyance or enclosed place, he must record the grounds for his belief that a search warrant or authorization cannot be obtained without affording opportunity for the concealment of evidence or facility for the escape of an offender. Section 43 of the NDPS Act provides that any officer of any of the departments mentioned in Section 42 may seize in any public place or in transit any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance etc. in respect of which he has reason to believe that an offence punishable under the Act has been committed. He is also authorized to detain and sea....