Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC1720; 2008CriLJ2250; JT2008(4)SC523; 2008(2)KLT36(SC); RLW2008(4)SC3549; 2008(4)SCALE592; (2008)5SCC161; 2008AIRSCW2365; AIR2008SC1720; 2008(5)SCC161; (2008)2SCC(Cri)558; 2008CriLJ2250; 2008(2)AICLR793
..... recorded in the judgment, impose a fine exceeding two lakh rupees.8. the statement of objects and reasons concerning the amending act of 2001 is as follows:narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 provides deterrent punishment for various offences relating to illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. most of the offences invite uniform punishment of minimum ten years' rigorous imprisonment which may extend up to twenty years ..... central government reads as under:s.o. 1055(e), dated 19-10-2001. - in exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (viia) and (xxiiia) of section 2 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (61 of 1985) and in supersession of ministry of finance, department of revenue notification s.o. 527(e) dated 16th july, 1996, except as respects things done or omitted ..... of the kerala high court in criminal appeal no. 185 of 2004 whereby the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant under section 21(c) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the ndps act') was confirmed.2. the relevant facts of the case are that on 5.3.2001, the intelligence officer was informed by an informant that two persons .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2006CriLJ674; 123(2005)DLT55; 2005(84)DRJ477
..... ahmed, j. a1. the common questions in these bail applications are:1) whether buprenorphine hydrochloride is a 'psychotropic substance' within the meaning of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ndps act) ?2) if yes, whether buprenorphine hydrochloride is a 'psychotropic substance' to which chapter vii of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ndps rules) apply ? to what effect ?it was contended ..... by the petitioners that buprenorphine hydrochloride i.p. injections which are the subject matter of the present applications are drugs specified under the drugs ..... petitioners. the allegation there was of the commission of an offence under section 21 of the ndps act which deals with 'narcotic drugs'. in the present case the petitioners have all been prosecuted for allegedly committing offences under section 22 of the ndps act which relates to 'psychotropic substances'. the definitions for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are entirely different. thereforee, the decision in k. r. nagappan (supra) also cannot be pressed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC2378; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)279; 1999CriLJ3672; 1999(65)ECC695; 1999LC545(SC); [1999(81)FLR303]; (1999)3GLR2483; JT1999(4)SC595; (1999)ILLJ254SC; 1999(II)OLR(SC)474; 199
..... illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs & psychotropic substances which was held in vienna, austria in 1988 was perhaps one of the first efforts, at an international level, to tackle the menace of drug trafficking throughout the comity of nations. the government of india has ratified this convention.5. prior to the passing of the ndps act, 1985 control over narcotic drugs was being generally ..... it was noticed that there was divergence of opinion between different benches of this court with regard to the ambit and scope of section 50 of narcotic drugs and - psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter 'ndps act') and in particular with regard to the admissibility of the evidence collected by an investigating officer during search and seizure conducted in violation of the provisions ..... of poppy husk, each without any permit/licence, this court is constrained to confirm the acquittal for the reasons that the mandatory requirements of section 50 of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 has not been complied with. protection given by section 50 is a valuable right to the offender and compliance thereof intended to be mandatory. in case ..... cases to a lager bench :one of the questions that has been raised in these appeals/special leave petitions is whether compliance with section 50 of the narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 is mandatory and, if so, what is the effect of the breach thereof. this question has had been engaging the attention of this court and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1989(3)Crimes146; 37(1989)DLT362; 1989(16)DRJ257; 1989(20)ECC28
..... of the department of revenue intelligence (dri for short) invested with powers under section 53 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1988 (ndps act' for short), were police officers within the meaning and scope of section 25 of the indian evidence act and whether the incriminating statement of an accused person recorded by them is inadmissible in evidence as envisaged ..... officers invested with powers under section 53 of the ndps act have all the above mentioned powers(14) the ndps act, as its preamble says, was enacted to consolidate. and amend the law relating to narcotic drugs, to make stringent provisions for the control and regulation of operations relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and for matters connected therewith. section 4 inquires the ..... investigating a cognizable offence. thereforee the fact that offences under the central excise and salt act were non-cognisable is of no consequence. the duty of the officers under the ndps act is, no doubt, detention and punishment of crimes relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. but one of the- main duty is also to prevent and combat the abuse ..... of narcotic drugs. in any case the decision of the supreme court in badaku joti's case ( .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2002CriLJ28; 2002(1)WLC692; 2002(1)WLN545
..... accused appellants labh singh, major singh and mangal singh for the offence under section 8/21,29 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ndps act'), accused appellant mohd. arshad for the offence under sections 23 and 29 of the ndps act and accused appellants arvinder singh and harjeet singh @ pappa for the offence under section 29 of the ..... ndps act and sentenced them in the following manner:-name of accused appellantsconvicted under sectionsentence awardedto each accused appellant.1. labh singh8 ..... that one lab singh (accused appellanl), resident of amritsar would be going to bombay via bikaner in truck no. wmq 3348 (hereinafter referred to as the truck) with narcotic drugs (heroin) concealed in the subject truck on 22-24.5.1996. that information was reduced into writing by pw 8 s. parmeshwaran and the same is ex.p/28 ..... 25 packets were recovered and they were marked as y1 to y25 and all the above packets were containing brown powder, which gave positive result of heroin, when tested with drug detection kit. thereafter, as already stated above, seven losts were prepared, in which packets were kept and out of seven lots, equal quantity of heroin was taken, which .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1996(1)BomCR483
..... on 24-9-1992 whereby both the accused-appellants have been held guilty for the offences punishable under section 21 read with section 29 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985, (for short, 'the ndps act') and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of rs. 1 lakh each and in default of payment of ..... e) dated 14th november, 1985 has specified the 'small quantity' for the purpose of section 27 of the ndps act, 1985 as given below:'in exercise of the powers conferred by explanation (1) to section 27 of the narcotic drug and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (61 of 1985) and in the partial modification of the notification of the government of india in the ..... ministry of finance, department of revenue s.o. no. 825(e), dated the 14th november, 1985 the central government hereby specifies the quantity mentioned in column (3) of the table below, in respect of the narcotic drug ..... . punishment for illegal possession in small quantity for personal consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or consumption of such drug or substance---whoever, in contravention of any provision of this act, or any rule or order made or permit issued thereunder, possess in small quantity any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, which is proved to have been intended for his personal consumption and .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2001CriLJ1298; 2000(4)WLC432; 2001(1)WLN536
..... passed by the learned special judge, ndps cases, chittorgarh by which he convicted both the accused appellants for the offence under section 8/18 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ndps act) and sentenced each of them to ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of rs. 1 lac and in default of payment of fine, they shall further ..... mandatory.17. in manohar lal v. state of rajasthan air 1996 sc 2880 : (1996 cri lj 1367), the hon'ble supreme court has held as under :-narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act (61 of 1985), section 50 search and seizure option given to accused is only to choose whether he would like to be searched by search officer or in presence ..... should thereafter proceed in accordance with the provisions of the ndps act. if he happens to be an empowered officer also, then from that stage onwards, he should ..... p.c. and when such search is completed at that stage section 50 of the ndps act would not be attracted and the question of complying with the requirements thereunder would not arise. if during such search or arrest there is a chance recovery of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance then the police officer, who is not empowered, should inform the empowered officer who .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(1)ALD(Cri)781; 2001CriLJ3183
..... was laid down by their lordships of the supreme court as under:' in view of section 42 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985, if the officer has reason to believe from personal knowledge or prior information received from any person that any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance (in respect of which an offence has been committed) is kept or concealed in any building, conveyance or enclosed ..... .3. the accused-appellants herein were facing in all five charges. the first charge against a-3 to a-5 was under section 22 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 ( for brevity ' ndps act'). it is alleged that they were in possession of psychotropic substance viz., methaqualone tablets. the second charge against a-2 to a-5 was under section 23 read with section 28 of ..... . but such thing was not done at the time of trial. therefore, this court is of the considered view that whatever the drug was seized by the prosecution does not tally with psychotropic substance as incorporated in section 2(xxiii) of ndps act. therefore, on this ground alone the prosecution must fail.41. the second ground, which was raised by the defence, was that there .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009CriLJ3042; 2009(1)SCALE51; (2009)2SCC624; 2009(1)LC346(SC):2009AIRSCW3648:2009(4)LHSC2710
..... of judicature at allahabad suspending the sentence awarded by the trial court to the respondent for having committed offences under sections 8/27a and 8/29 of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (for short 'the ndps act') and granting him bail.4. since in this appeal we propose to deal with the short question, viz. whether the high court, while accepting the prayer for ..... grant of bail, had kept in view the parameters of section 37 of the ndps act, we deem it unnecessary to advert to the facts of the case against the respondent ..... the respondent, it could not be said at this stage that the respondent was not guilty of the offences for which he had been charged and convicted. we find no substance in the argument of learned counsel for the respondent that the observation of the learned judge to the effect that 'nothing has been found from his possession' by itself shows ..... and not alternative. the satisfaction contemplated regarding the accused being not guilty, has to be based on 'reasonable grounds'. the expression 'reasonable grounds' has not been defined in the said act but means something more than prima facie grounds. it connotes substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence he is charged with. the reasonable .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(1)ALD(Cri)899; 2008(2)ALT(Cri)402; JT2008(1)SC279; RLW2008(2)SC1574; (2008)4SCC668; 2008AIRSCW627; 2008(1)Crimes154; AIR2008SC1044; 2008(4)SCC668; (2008)2SCC(Cri)474; 2008(1)SCALE165
..... with one phool chand and ram prasad, was accused of offences under the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the ndps act') and ultimately charges were framed against them by the special judge under section 8/18 and in the alternative under section 8/18/29 of the aforesaid act. on denying the charges framed against them the accused persons were sent ..... bureau. from the facts of the said case, it appears that apart from the statement made by naushad under section 67 of the ndps act there was other evidence to indicate that business in narcotic drugs was being transacted from his house. his appeal was therefore rejected. as far as mehaboob was concerned, his statement did not contain any statement, which could involve ..... the remaining opium was sealed under the panchnama (exh.p.2)10. on the basis of the proceeding in terms of section 57 of the ndps act and the first information report filed before the narcotic superintendent, one suresh badlani was appointed as investigating officer and the seized opium along with samples were deposited in the malkhana. at this point of ..... the above mentioned decisions dealt with other criminal enactments, the next case referred to by mr. gambhir, namely, a.k. mehaboob v. intelligence officer, narcotics control bureau : (2001)10scc203 is a decision under the ndps act with due regard to the provisions of sections 42 and 67 thereof. the criminal appeal of shri a.k. mehaboob was heard alongwith the appeal filed .....Tag this Judgment!