Intelligence Officer/Inspector-Mrs. Krishna Chaube on 10.12.1999 at about 06:30 PM had received the secret information, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya would be carrying narcotic substances in an Auto Rickshaw-GJ9T2355 at about 07:00 AM on 11.12.1999 and shall be passing through Shahpur Darwaja. It was recorded and reported to Superior Officer-Mr. Pawan Singh Tomar. Auto Rickshaw-GJ9T2355 was chased and found abandoned near a road. Abdul had escaped. On conducting a search, a driving license of one Rajubhai was found in addition to 1.450 kilograms of charas.
The secret information, as received by Mrs. Chaube, was limited to, Abdul was to carry contraband via an Auto Rickshaw from a particular route. It can be safely concluded, search conducted at Abdul’s residence was not a continuance of a search of Auto Rickshaw-GJ9T2355. Court has laid down the test for “acts forming part of same transaction” in Gentela Vijyvardhan Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1996) 6 SCC 241 adopted by a 3-Judges Bench in Dhal Singh Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2016) SCC OnLine SC 983.
It is never explained by Mr. Tomar how he was able to identify Abdul inside Auto Rickshaw-GJ9T2355 while it was being driven at a high speed. It is also not their case, any previous photographic identification for Abdul was provided. We are of view, search/raid conducted at Abdul’s house was bereft of mandatory statutory compliance of Section 41(2) of The Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Acquitted.
– Hon’ble Justice Augustine George Masih, Abdul Hamid Chandmiya v. State of Gujarat, [Criminal Appeal No. 2320 of 2009].
The Last Word 
You must be logged in to post a comment.