Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.28 seconds)
Hasibul Islam vs The State Of Bihar on 10 December, 2024 cites

Noor Aga vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 9 July, 2008

8. Before any proposed disposal/destruction mandate of Section 52A of the NPDS Act requires to be duly complied with starting with an application to that effect. A Court should be satisfied with such compliance while deciding the case. The onus is entirely on the prosecution in a given case to satisfy the Court when such an issue arises for consideration. Production of seized material is a factor to establish seizure followed by recovery. One has to remember that the provisions of the NDPS Act are both stringent and rigorous and therefore the burden heavily lies on the prosecution. Non-production of a physical evidence would lead to a negative inference within the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.412 of 2017 dt.10-12-2024 30/34 meaning of Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (hereinafter referred to as the Evidence Act). The procedure contemplated through the notification has an element of fair play such as the deposit of the seal, numbering the containers in seriatim wise and keeping them in lots preceded by compliance of the procedure for drawing samples. The afore-stated principles of law are dealt with in extenso in Noor Aga v. State of Punjab, (2008) 16 SCC 417:
Supreme Court of India Cites 90 - Cited by 746 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1   2 Next