Compliance With S.50 NDPS Act Mandatory Even If Accused Himself Produces Contraband From Pocket During Body Search: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has recently held that the compliance with Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act is mandatory even when the accused himself produces contraband from his pocket, during body search.For context, Section 50 of the NDPS Act deals with Conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.According to the Section, when a duly...
The Kerala High Court has recently held that the compliance with Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act is mandatory even when the accused himself produces contraband from his pocket, during body search.
For context, Section 50 of the NDPS Act deals with Conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.
According to the Section, when a duly authorised officer is searching any person under the provisions of the Act, such person shall be produced before the nearest gazetted Officer of any department mentioned in the Act or to the nearest Magistrate. The gazetted Officer or the Magistrate before whom the person is brought shall see if there is reasonable ground for search and then direct the search to be made.
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath made the observation in a bail application moved by a sole accused in an NDPS case.
The prosecution case is that the accused was found in possession of 52.45 grams of MDMA at a footpath in Thamarassery, Kozhikode. The counsel for the applicant argued that there was a violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, hence the search and seizure was vitiated.
“...it is a case where the contraband was seized after conducting a body search of the applicant, though the applicant himself took the contraband from his pocket and handed it over to the detecting officer.When a body search is conducted, it is mandatory that Section 50 of the NDPS Act be complied with. The prosecution has no case at all that there was compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. Hence, I am of the view that the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot be attributed to the applicant,” the Court said.
The Court examined the seizure mahazar and noted that the detecting officer found the applicant standing on the side of the road while conducting patrol duty. The detecting officer intercepted the applicant and conducted a search of his body. During the search, the officer found something bulging in the front pocket of the applicant's pants and asked the applicant to take the same out.
The applicant took the packet out and handed it over to the detecting officer and on examination it was found to be MDMA.
The Court noted that the reading of search mahazar reveals that there was no compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act and hence the rigor of Section 37 which deals with cognizable and non-bailable offence is not applicable in the present instance.
The Court thus allowed the bail application on conditions.
Case Title: Vishnu N P v State of Kerala
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 356
Case No: B. A. 3181/ 2026
Counsel for Petitioner: M. Devesh, M. Anuroop, Murshid Ali M.., Jyothis Mary, S.K. Sreelakshmy
Counsel for Respondent: Thomas Saby Vadakekut (PP)