Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

The State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Angrejo Devi on 23 November, 2022

Bench: B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath

                                   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                               CRIMINAL APPEAL     NO(S).      959/2012



     THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH                                            APPELLANT(S)


                                                   VERSUS

     ANGREJO DEVI & ORS.                                                  RESPONDENT(S)

                                                   WITH
                                            Crl.A. No. 957/2012
                                            Crl.A. No. 958/2012
                          Crl.A. No. 2040/2022 @ SLP(Crl) No. 761/2014

                                                 O R D E R

1. Leave granted in SLP(Crl) No.761/2014.

2. The High Court basically allowed the appeals on the ground that the prosecution has failed to establish that the seized material is not the genesis of a plant of Papaver somniferum L or any other plant, which is notified by the Central Government under Section 2(xvii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act’).

3. On a reference, this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Nirmal Kaur alias Nimmo and Others, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1462, has decided the issue and it has been held that once it is found that the seized material Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Narendra Prasad Date: 2022.11.23 17:45:58 IST contain ‘morphine’ and ‘meconic acid’ it is sufficient to Reason: establish that the seized material comes within the 1 definition of Section 2(xvii) of the NDPS Act.

4. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgments and orders are quashed and set aside and the cases are remitted back to the High Court to consider the same afresh, in accordance with the judgment of this Court rendered in Nirmal Kaur alias Nimmo and Others (supra).

5. The sentence imposed on the respondents herein are suspended till the High Court decides the matters on merits.

6. The appeals are allowed in the aforesaid terms.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

...........................J ( B.R. GAVAI ) ...........................J ( VIKRAM NATH ) NEW DELHI NOVEMBER 23, 2022 2 ITEM NO.103 COURT NO.9 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 959/2012 THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANGREJO DEVI & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH Crl.A. No. 957/2012 (II-C) (IA No. 4276/2009 - STAY APPLICATION) Crl.A. No. 958/2012 (II-C) SLP(Crl) No. 761/2014 (II-C) (IA No. 1913/2014 - STAY APPLICATION) Date : 23-11-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH Amicus Curiae Mr. K. Parameshwar,Sr.Adv.
Ms. Arti Gupta, Adv.
For Appellant(s) Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, AOR (AAG/Himachal Pradesh) Ms. Bihu Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Akshay C. Shrivastava,Adv. Ms. Pratiksha Vij,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,ASG Mr. Jayant K Sud, ASG Ms. Sonia Mathur,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi,Adv. Mr. G.S. Makker,Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyag Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal Adv.
Mr. Neeraj Jain,Sr.Adv.
Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR Mr. R. Nedumaran, AOR 3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted in SLP(Crl) No.761/2014. The appeals are allowed, in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 4