Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.35 seconds)The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 41 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Dharampal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 9 September, 2010
Learned State counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is
deemed to be in possession of recovery effected from her and has relied upon a
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dharampal Singh Vs. State of
Punjab, 2010 (4) RCR (Crl.) 504, wherein opium was recovered from dickey
of the car and two accused, who were travelling in the said car, were held to be
in conscious possession. A perusal of this judgment would show that the
6 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 02-06-2022 07:06:11 :::
CRM-M-22971-2022 -7-
Hon'ble Supreme Court, while deciding an appeal against the judgment of
conviction, on the basis of appreciation of the evidence, held that in such
circumstances, both the persons, who were occupiers of the car, would be in
conscious possession of the contraband, however, in the instant case, the case is
still at the investigation stage and it is yet to be concluded by the prosecution
whether Sagar Kalyan @ Daddu, husband of the petitioner, being head of the
family, was in conscious possession of the recovery, which was effected in
terms of disclosure statement of the petitioner, after her arrest, as from her
personal search, only 20 grams of heroin was recovered, which falls in non-
commercial quantity.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 21 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Arjan Singh And Anr vs The State Of Punjab And Ors on 8 October, 1968
Learned counsel has also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble
4 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 02-06-2022 07:06:11 :::
CRM-M-22971-2022 -5-
Supreme Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.530 of 2012 arising out of SLP
(Crl.) No.7118 of 2010 (Arjan Singh Vs. State of Punjab), wherein it is
observed that prosecution case is improbable, when it is stated that the police
had first gone to shop of the accused and when nothing incriminating was
found, he recorded the disclosure statement and recovery of some amount was
effected from his house. It is further observed that in other words, the accused,
by recording disclosure statement, seems to have invited and led the police to
the recovery of narcotic substance, at his own instance and therefore, recovery
seems to be unnatural.