THIMMAIAH A. M. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 23/12/2022 at 3:00 p.m. the Police Sub-Inspector received a credible information, that the accused were trying to sell MDMA and other narcotic substances, and upon receiving such information, the Police Sub-Inspector went to the spot accompanied by the staff members & Gazetted Officer and the Assistant Director of Mysuru Regional Forensic Laboratory and with two panch witnesses and also took a MDMA testing kit and a laptop to the spot. It was further alleged that, when the Police Sub-Inspector came to the spot, the accused tried to escape and the police surrounded and apprehended them.

(2.) On enquiry, the accused admitted that they were in possession of MDMA, Ecstasy Tablets and LSD blots with an intent to sell them. Upon conducting the body search, the accused were found in possession of the aforesaid narcotic substances. Thereafter, the FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 22B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (for short 'the Act').

(3.) Sri. A.S.Ponnanna, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners' counsel submits that search was conducted in violation of the mandatory provisions contained in Ss. 42 and 50 of the Act. The said provisions are mandatory and as such, the search conducted stands vitiated and accused No.2 has made out a prima facie case to enlarge him on bail. In support, he places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sukhdev Singh Vs. State of Haryana reported in 2013 (2) SCC 212 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnail Singh Vs. State of Haryana reported in 2009 (8) SCC 539.