Delhi court acquits man in NDPS case citing 'serious' lapses in investigation

A Delhi court has acquitted a man accused of possessing 5.3 kg of ganja, saying serious lapses in investigation and non-compliance with mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act made the prosecution's case doubtful. Additional Sessions Judge Manu Vedwan was hearing the case against Firoz alias Kallum, who was booked under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act at the Pandav Nagar police station. In the order dated April 24, the court said, ''It also needs to be pinpointed that even after the seizure of the recovered contrabands, no steps were taken by the investigating officer (IO) under Section 52A of the NDPS Act. The IO failed to comply with the provisions altogether.'' According to the prosecution, on August 14, 2021, police received a tip-off that a man was selling ganja in the Shashi Garden area in east Delhi. Police claimed a raid was conducted, and Firoz was apprehended with a black backpack containing 35 small packets and one large packet containing 5.3 kg of ganja. The court, however, found several discrepancies in the prosecution's case. It noted that police had checked the accused's bag and found the alleged contraband before serving a notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which requires informing the accused of his right to be searched before a magistrate or a gazetted officer. ''The circumstances in which they were stated to be complied seem not in line with the procedure/mandate of the law,'' the judge said. The court also flagged the absence of public witnesses despite their availability, and said no notice was served on persons who refused to join the raid. It also observed that no photography or videography of the recovery was conducted. ''Not finding any public witness and lack of photography and videography of the alleged recovery in today's time and age may cast a doubt on the credibility of the evidence,'' the court said. The judge also noted that only one of the 35 packets was sent for forensic examination, while the remaining were left untested. Giving the accused the benefit of doubt, the court said it was not safe to rely solely on the uncorroborated testimonies of police officers and held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)