VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for suspension of remaining sentence of the applicant, who has been convicted and sentenced as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_72_LAWS(P&H)4_2023_1.html</FRM>

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that although the applicant does not fulfill the requirements of Daler Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (1) RCR (Criminal) 316, on merits his sentence deserves to be suspended as Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act, 1985 has not been complied with.

(3.) The argument is that according to the FIR, the petitioner was apprehended by the Investigating Officer on an apprehension that he was carrying some narcotic substance. Thereafter, personal search was conducted in the absence of a Gazetted Officer. The applicant was also found carrying a polythene bag and before opening the same, a Gazetted Officer was called. A Gazetted Officer should have been called even when personal search of the petitioner was conducted as is evident from judgment dtd. 28/2/2014 passed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2005, State of Rajasthan vs. Parmanand and another. Thus, the conviction is bad in law and the remaining sentence deserves to be suspended.