Wednesday, October 21, 2020
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

SC constitution bench says acquittal can’t be a general rule when accused and IO are the same in NDPS cases

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court’s 5-Judge Constitution bench today ruled that it cannot be held as a general proposition that an accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 (NDPS) is entitled to acquittal merely because the complainant is also the investigating officer (IO).

The bench, comprising Justices Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, M R Shah and S. Ravindra Bhat observed:

“Merely because the informant and the investigating officer is the same, it cannot be said that the investigation is biased and the trial is vitiated.”

The Constitution Bench clarified that it depends on the facts and circumstances of each case if the investigation has become tainted because the informant and the investigation officer were the same. It cannot be held as a blanket rule.

Narcotic Drugs

The bench said that the acquittal already given by the Supreme Court on the ground that the investigating officer and the complainant was the same will apply to the facts of those cases only and cannot apply as a general rule.

The bench was hearing on a question of law referred by a three-judge bench on whether trial of cases under NDPS Act will be vitiated if the informant and the investigating officer is the same person.

A three-judge bench in the case of Mohanlal vs State of Punjab had held that trial of cases under act will be vitiated if the informant and the investigating officer is the same person.

Read Also: Mallya’s review petition against contempt judgment dismissed by SC

However, the two-judge bench in the case of Mukesh Singh vs State differed on the view and had observed:

“Where the complainant himself had conducted investigation, such aspect of the matter can certainly be given due weightage while assessing the evidence on record but it would be completely different thing to say that the trial itself would be vitiated for such infraction.”

In Varinder Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh a three-judge bench held that the decision in the Mohanlal case decision will not be applicable to trials and appeals pending as on the date of that decision.

– India Legal Bureau

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

News Update

Delhi High Court orders police to remove barricades around 130-year-old mosque to facilitate namaaz

The Delhi High Court has ordered Delhi Police to remove the barricades in vicinity to the 130-year-old mosque located at Basant Nagar on Rao Tula Ram Marg, so that those visiting the place to offer namaaz do not have to face troubles.

Uttarakhand High Court issues notice to Maharashtra Governor for non-payment of govt dues

The Uttarakhand High Court has issued a Contempt of court notice to former Chief Minister of Uttarakhand and present Governor of Maharashtra, Bhagat Singh Koshyari in the matter of not depositing his arrears of rent and other bills.

Allahabad High Court pulls up Varanasi Municipal corporation for dereliction of duty

The Allahabad High Court has pulled up the Municipal Authorities of Varanasi, while hearing a PIL filed by Dhyanesh Bhattacharya and four others raising a serious issue with regard to failing in the discharge of public duties by the Urban Local Self Government.

Durga puja pandals: Calcutta High Court partially eases ‘no-entry’ order

The Calcutta High Court today eased its order which declared that Durga Puja pandals were "no-entry zones" for visitors in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

8d08bcc7d2617bcb46e599532a6af0dc75b2918a