NDPS ACT | Minor Discrepancy In Sample's Weight Sent To Forensic Lab Can't Shake Roots Of Prosecution's Case: Allahabad High Court

Dismissing two bail pleas filed by Accused under the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Allahabad High Court has observed a minor discrepancy in the weight of the sample sent to the Forensic Laboratory cannot shake the roots of the prosecution case.The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal denied bail to the two Accused [Chhotey Lal and Kavinder Kumar] booked under Sections 8(C)/18/29 of the NDPS Act after they were arrested from the general bogey of a Train for allegedly being in possession of a total of 7 KG of opium.The case in briefEssentially, 4 Kg and 3 Kg of Opium was recovered respectively from Chhotey Lal and Kavinder Kumar being contained in their bags. The sample of 25 grams was taken from each packet and sealed and the same was sent for forensic analysis.Now, the accused moved to the High Court arguing that out of seven samples received, there was a difference in weight in three samples, out of which, samples P2S1 and P6S1 were found to be of 22.2 grams and 21.6 grams respectively. Thus, it was submitted that they were found deficient in the requisite weight by 2.8 grams and 3.4 grams respectively.Against this backdrop, it was submitted that the quantity of each sample for chemical analysis should not be less than 24 grams in the case of Opium and since the requisite directions provided in Standing Order 1/89 dated 13.06.1989 have not been followed, therefore, it was argued, the applicants are entitled for bail on this ground only.On the other hand, the counsel for the N.C.B argeud that the applicants are the perpetrator of the crime and a total of 7 Kg of illegal Opium had been recovered from the conscious and constructive possession of the applicants, which is much more than the commercial quantity. It was further contended that the Standing Order 1/89 of the N.C.B. was completely complied with and that the minor difference in weight of two samples out of seven does not falsify the prosecution story.Significantly, the Counsel for the NCB referred to Section 52(1) of the NDPS Act, to argue that in compliance with this provision, the sample was taken before the concerned Magistrate, and as such, the taking of the sample before a Magistrate rules out any kind of adulteration or interpolation in the collection of the sample.Court's observationsNoting that the recovered contraband is heavy in quantity and there has been compliance with the mandatory provision of N.D.P.S. Act, the Court observed thus:"The presence of applicants far away from their usual place of residence further casts shadow on his defence. The sample has been taken before the concerned Magistrate, which negates the theory of any kind of adulteration. There is nothing on record to suggest that there is any animosity of the accused to the officials of the N.C.B. The Standing Order No. 1/88 has been complied with. The call details further corroborate the prosecution story."Consequently, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by the counsels for the parties, nature of offence, evidence on record, pending investigation, and considering the complicity of the accused, the severity of punishment, the Court denied them bail.Case title - Chhotey Lal v. U.O.I. N.C.B. along with a connected matter Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 214Click here To Read/Download Order

NDPS ACT | Minor Discrepancy In Sample's Weight Sent To Forensic Lab Can't Shake Roots Of Prosecution's Case: Allahabad High Court

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags