Comply with the law: Delhi court pulls up police on contraband seizure

“…Copy of the order be sent to all DCPs — Shahdara, east and northeast, in the jurisdiction of whom some police stations of Shahdara judicial district are located. DCPs shall ensure that police staff strictly comply (with) Section 50 of the NDPS Act in the event a contraband is recovered from personal search of any accused,” states the order.

“…Hon’ble Supreme Court had set aside the judgments of trial court as well as High Court on this aspect, when both the courts below concluded that the requirements of Section 50 stood complied that the consent of the accused is needed to conduct search, and refusal has to be taken in writing before a gazetted officer. Even if the prosecution establishes its whole story against the accused, that won’t be sufficient to convict the accused under provisions of Section 20 of NDPS Act…,” states the order.

In the present case, police received information on August 2 last year that a woman was selling heroin outside her home in Kasturba Nagar.

ASJ Savitri said, “The argument advanced by leading additional public prosecutor, that the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment was at the stage of acquittal and not charge, fails to convince me. Accordingly, in view of legal lacuna in the search of proceedings, I discharge the accused, Rajni, of the offence punishable under Section 20 of NDPS Act.”

“Information was shared with the senior officials and they were asked to conduct a raid. After reaching her home, police asked passersby to join their raid as witnesses, but they all left. Police then arrested her from outside her home on the instance of their informer. Police told her that she has to come along with them before a gazetted officer, where they would frisk her, or wait till a gazetted officer reaches the spot. But she refused and asked them to conduct her checking, following which police recovered 132 packets of 9.7 gram heroin from her possession,” a senior police officer said, adding that an FIR was registered against her at Vivek Vihar police station.

Additional public prosecutor argued that the accused is liable to be charged under Section 21 of NDPC Act, but her counsel submitted that she cannot be charged in view of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court.