RAHUL Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

(2.) According to prosecution story the applicant has been arrested at 6.10. a.m. by the police party. The applicant has told his name and from his personal search 290 gm smack was recovered. Country made pistol of 12 Bore and 2 live cartridges have also been recovered from the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of Sec. 50 of N.D.P.S. Act as he has not been apprised about his right to be searched before the gazetted officer or the Magistrate.

(3.) It is the admitted case of the prosecution that the applicant has not been produced before the Magistrate or gazetted officer. None of the police officer of the raiding party who recovered the alleged contraband from him were the gazetted officer hence they were not empowered to make the search from the applicant as provided under Sec. 50 of N.D.P.S. Act except in the presence of a Magistrate or gazetted officer.