news details |
|
|
| Narco accused acquitted as prosecution fails | | | Early Times Report
Bhaderwah, Nov 21 (JNF): A local court on Thursday acquitted an accused facing trail in NDPS, observing that prosecution case was doubtful.
The accused has been identified as Ishtiaq Ahmad son of Abdul Rehman Gojal and Abdul Latief Bhat son of Shamas u Din Bhat.
According to the police case that on 31/ 7/2010 an information was received in PS Bhaderwah that the accused persons who are drug peddlers are coming towards Bhaderwah town with some drugs, on the basis of which Crime No. 153/2010 for the commission of offence under section 8/22 NDPS Act was registered in PS Bhaderwah and investigation was entrusted to PW-8 Mohammad Iqbal Sub Inspector. The I.O along with posse of police and CRPF laid naka at Launcher Morh Bhaderwah. The SDPO & Naib Tehsildar Bhaderwah were also present at naka when the accused persons came from Sartingal side towards Bhaderwah town who were stopped for checking.
The option was given to the accused whether they wanted any gazetted officer for their search. From the possession of accused Ishtiaq a packet containing 840 grams of heroin and from possession of accused Abdul Latief packet containing 560 grams of heroin were recovered and seized. After completion of investigation challan was presented.
After hearing both the sides, Principal Sessions Judge Bhaderwah MK Sharma observed that the investigating officer intentionally and deliberately breached the provisions of section 55.
He could not say that since the provisions of Section 55 are directory in nature, he was not bound to comply with the same.
If such a stand of the Investigating officer is taken, as correct, then the provisions of the Act, which are directory, in nature, would be flouted with impunity, by the investigating officers. Compliance of the said provisions is an indicator towards the reasonable, fair and just procedure, adopted by the Investigating Officer, during the course of search and seizure.
Non-compliance of such a provision, deliberately and intentionally, must be viewed with suspicion and held that the prosecution has not complied with the requirements of law while conducting investigation which has not only caused prejudice to the accused but has cast doubt on the prosecution story and acquitted the accused from the charges leveled against him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
