MAKHAN SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
imposed on him is set aside and this appeal is allowed
Provisions considered
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 15, 50, 52
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 161
Judgment
1.2. The High Court discarded the evidence of PW1 MAKHAN SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA 791 and DW2 observing that these independent witnesses A hail from the same village to which accused belongs and the accused might have approached the witnesses through respectables of the village to resile from his statement. That apart, the High Court also observed that both the independent witnesses did not explain the B circumstances or compulsions in which they had to sign the blank papers. The reasoning of the High Court is based more on assumptions than on acceptable basis. When PW1 and DW2 have asserted that they have signed only the blank papers, the courts below ought to have C considered them in proper perspective. [Para 9] [795-B D]
2.1. Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act will come into play only in the case of personal search of D the accuse~ and not of some baggage like a bag, article or container, etc. which the accused may be carrying ought to be searched [Para 15] [798-C]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: imposed on him is set aside and this appeal is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 15, 50, 52; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.