Mere Breach Of S.52A NDPS Act Not Fatal To Trial If Contraband Recovery Otherwise Proved : Supreme Court

Highlighting that substantive justice outweighs procedural irregularities, the Supreme Court recently upheld the conviction of an individual for possessing contraband, rejecting his plea for acquittal based on alleged non-compliance with Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The Court observed that mere non-compliance with Section 52A would not be fatal to the prosecution's case when other cogent evidence proves the recovery of the contraband from the accused possession. “ If the other material on record adduced by the prosecution, oral or documentary inspires confidence and satisfies the court as regards the recovery as-well as conscious possession of the contraband from the accused persons, then even in such cases, the courts can without hesitation proceed to hold the accused guilty notwithstanding any procedural defect in terms of Section 52A of the NDPS Act.”, the court added. If the other material on record adduced by the prosecution, oral or documentary inspires confidence and satisfies the court as regards the recovery as-well as conscious possession of the contraband from the accused persons, then even in such cases, the courts can without hesitation proceed to hold the accused guilty notwithstanding any procedural defect in terms of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. Once the foundational facts laid indicate non-compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act, the onus would thereafter be on the prosecution to prove by cogent evidence that either there was substantial compliance with the mandate of Section 52A of the NDPS Act OR satisfy the court that such non-compliance does not affect its case against the accused, and the standard of proof required would be beyond a reasonable doubt.