NDPS - Non-examination of independent witnesses and procedural irregularities under Section 52-A do not vitiate the prosecution

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in 23.500 kg Ganja Case Procedural Irregularities Not Fatal to Prosecution; Minimum Sentence Under NDPS Act Enforced

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the conviction and sentencing of Jothi @ Nagajothi, who was found guilty of possessing 23.500 kg of ganja, classified as a commercial quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The appeal, challenging the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, was dismissed by a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi.

The appellant was sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 for each count of the offenses under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) of the NDPS Act. The Supreme Court emphasized that procedural irregularities, such as the non-examination of independent witnesses and the absence of a Magistrate during the sampling procedure, did not vitiate the prosecution case, provided the integrity of the seized substance and the chain of custody remained intact.

The case began on September 21, 2019, when a Sub-Inspector received a tip-off about the transportation of ganja on a two-wheeler. Upon interception, the police seized the contraband along with cash and drew samples for forensic analysis. The appellant, along with her husband, was subsequently charged and convicted by the Trial Court, with the High Court affirming the decision.

The appellant's counsel argued that the prosecution's case was flawed due to the absence of independent witnesses, improper sampling procedures, and discrepancies in sample identification. However, the Court found these contentions unconvincing. It noted that the testimony of official witnesses was consistent and credible, and the chain of custody was well-preserved. The Court also ruled that the absence of independent witnesses is not detrimental if the official testimony is reliable.

Further, the Court rejected the plea for sentence reduction on humanitarian grounds, citing the mandatory minimum sentence provisions of the NDPS Act. It reiterated that the law does not allow for judicial discretion to override statutory minimum punishments, even considering the appellant's young age and her role as a caregiver to a minor child.

The judgment underscores the strict enforcement of the NDPS Act and clarifies that procedural lapses do not automatically invalidate a prosecution case unless they critically affect the evidence's integrity. This decision affirms the judiciary's commitment to upholding the statutory framework designed to combat drug-related offenses in India.

Bottom Line:

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Non-examination of independent witnesses and procedural irregularities under Section 52-A do not vitiate the prosecution case if the integrity of the seized substance and chain of custody remain intact.

Statutory provisions: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 52A(2), 52A(4); Evidence Act, 1872; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 161

Jothi @ Nagajothi v. State, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2820778