Spread the love

 Keywords- NDPS, Supreme Court, CFCL

In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India, the conviction of Jagwinder Singh under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) it was held that it is not necessary by law to require an independent witness to prove a charge attracting the provisions of the NDPS Act.

According to the facts of the case, Jagwinder Singh and others were found in possession of 54Kgs of poppy husk, leading to their arrest. The recovery was made from the car in which the petitioner was travelling. 

The appellant argued that he was just travelling in the car, and he was not in conscious possession of the substance. It was also mentioned that the procedure including the filling up of the CFCL Form was not followed at the place of recovery. 

It was also contemplated that the procedure regarding the seizure and recovery according to the mentioned rules in the NDPS Act wasn’t followed. 

The appellant argued that only police witnesses had been examined in, and there was absence of an independent witness.

However, it was argued by the State that all the necessary submissions have been taken into consideration by the lower Courts and the Trial Court had imposed only a minimum sentence of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment on the Appellant. 

The judges rejected the argument mentioning that procedural compliance was followed, and the plea contains no merit in it. The Court, hence, refused to interfere with the High Court’s order. 

It was also noted by the judges that the delay in sending the sample for FSL report was not fatal to the prosecution. The orders had been taken from the judicial magistrate, validating all the procedural steps. 

Hence, the plea was dismissed. 

Written by – Aasmi Abrol, College Name- School of Law, Model Institute of Engineering and Technology, University of Jammu, 3rd Semester, 2nd Year, BBA-LLB (Hons.), An intern under Legal Vidhiya  


Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.


Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *