Law:

Section:

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997) --------- ----------Ss. 9(c), 35 & 36 --------- Possessing and trafficking narcotics --------- Appreciation of evidence --------- Benefit of doubt --------- Glaring discrepancies existed in the statements of both the prosecution witnesses --------- Defence witness produced by accused, was Deputy Assistant Director ASF, (Airport), who supported the version of accused; his statement could not be ignored --------- Analysis of the sample of recovered narcotics, was actually conducted by the Bio Chemist, and not by the Chemical Examiner himself --------- Bio Chemist could not be termed as Government Analyst in terms of S.35 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 --------- Report of Bio Chemist though bore the signatures of the Chemical Examiner, but same could not be equated or termed as a report prepared by the Government Analyst --------- Said report would become admissible only after fulfilling of the pre-requisite laid down in S.36 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 --------- Prosecution, having failed to establish the substantial compliance of S.36 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, rendered the report inadmissible --------- Statement of Chemical Examiner with regard to quantity of sample received by him, being discrepant, his report did not support the prosecution case on that aspect --------- Prosecution had failed to establish that the sample received in the Office of Chemical Examiner was actually related to the case --------- In the light of serious discrepancies, prosecution had failed to discharge its onus --------- Recovery proceedings conducted by the Investigating Officer, were not free from doubt --------- Case of prosecution was fraught with doubts, and for earning relief of acquittal, accused was not obliged to establish number of circumstances creating doubts, but even a single circumstance, creating a reasonable doubt in the prudent mind, was sufficient to extend the benefit of doubt to accused --------- Impugned passed by the Trial Court, was set aside; accused was acquitted of the charge levelled against him and was released, in circumstances.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492