Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.29 seconds)Section 57 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 67 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 50 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 29 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 35 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 54 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
State Of Punjab vs Balwant Rai on 24 February, 2005
33. It is a case of recovery of huge quantity of heroin. It is not
possible to plant such a huge quantity upon a persons. Moreover,
there is no reason to falsely implicate the accused In the case of
State of Punjab Vs. Balwant Rai 2005(1) JCC (Narcotics) 103: "The
quantity was large, it was held that the question of implanting does
not arise".
(Dr.) Sanjiv Sharma vs State Of H.P. And Anr. on 25 November, 2005
In the case of Sanjiv Kumar Vs. State of H.P. 2005(1)
Crimes 358 (H.P.) it was observed: "It is not believable that the
police would implicate an innocent person to such a serious case by
planting a huge quantity of charas on his person...... police had no
axe to grind in implicating the accused".
Madan Lal And Anr vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 19 August, 2003
34. It was held in the case of Madan Lal and another vs. State
of Himachal Pradesh 2003 (3) JCC 1330 that once the possession
is established the person who claimed that it was not the conscious
possession has to establish it because how he came to be in
possession is within its special knowledge. Section 35 of the Act give
a statutory recognition to its possession before of a presumption
available on record and similar is the position in terms of section 54
where also presumption is available to be drawn from the possession
of illicit articles. In the instant case the accused by preponderance of
probability of evidence failed to rebut the presumption that he was not
in conscious possession of the same.