2004 (4) TMI 670

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sunita Rao and Shakil Ahmed, Advs For the Respondent : K.R. Sasiprabhu, Ramesh Babu M.R., Sushma Suri, Subramonium Prasad and Vibha Datta Makhija, Advs. ORDER 1. The appellants in these two appeals were tried by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Madurai. Both of them were found guilty of offences under Section 3(c) read with Section 20(b)(2) of the NDPS Act. PW-7 the Sub-Inspector, Thirumanga....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Court and the High Court dismissed their two appeals and hence these appeals by way of Special Leave. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellants. The counsel for the appellants contended that PW-8 the Inspector after conducting search prepared the FIR and it was on the basis of the statement of PW8 the case was registered against the appellants and it is argued that PW-8 was the complai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Court in State v. V. Jayapaul 2004 CriLJ 1819 wherein it was observed that: "We find no principle or binding authority to hold that the moment the competent police officer, on the basis of information received, makes out an FIR incorporating his name as the informant, he forfeits his right to investigate. If at all, such investigation could only be assailed on the ground of bias or real l....