Summary
The High Court acquitted two accused because their personal searches did not comply with section 50, although the poppy husk was recovered independently from their vehicle and nothing incriminating was found on their persons. The Supreme Court held that a personal-search defect did not invalidate the separately proved vehicle recovery, restored the convictions and reduced the substantive prison terms.
Issues
- Whether non-compliance in personal search invalidated an independently proved recovery from a vehicle.
Provisions considered
- Section 50, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985The safeguards govern personal search and did not invalidate the independent vehicle recovery on these facts. (¶¶ 11, 12, 14, 16, 17)
Held
- The personal-search safeguards require strict compliance. Contraband recovered from a person through a search violating those safeguards cannot alone sustain the conviction; the section does not extend to vehicle, container or premises searches. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 15, 16)
- A defect in personal search does not taint a separately proved vehicle recovery. Here no contraband was recovered personally, while seven bags of poppy husk in the vehicle established the relevant possession. The High Court wrongly extended the personal-search defect to that recovery. (¶¶ 17, 19, 20)
- Dilip v. State of M.P. was incorrect insofar as it extended the benefit of personal-search non-compliance to independent vehicle recovery, contrary to the Constitution Bench principles in Baldev Singh. (¶ 18)
Result
The appeals were allowed and the Trial Court convictions restored. Substantive imprisonment was reduced from twelve to ten years; the Rs.2 lakh fine each and two-year default terms remained. The accused were to surrender by 15 November 2019, failing which they were to be taken into custody. Compliance was to be reported by 1 December 2019.