Supreme Court: Bald Allegation Of Section 52A Non-Compliance Won't Result In Acquittal Unless Foundational Facts Of Non-Compliance Proved | NDPS Act

The court doubted the appellant's case because the investigating officer detailed the recovery process and sealing of the contraband in compliance with Section 52A which was not questioned by the appellant during cross-examination of the prosecution witness that there was no compliance with Section 52A.

- 

The Supreme Court in the case Rajwant Singh Versus The State Of Haryana observed and has reiterated that unless the foundational facts of non-compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act are not proved by the accused, the accused cannot assert a bald allegation that the conviction for possessing contraband cannot be sustained due to non-compliance of Section 52A of the NDPS Act.

The bench comprising of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan was hearing the present matter.

The bench in the case was hearing the matter wherein the accused was booked for possessing contraband and sought acquittal due to non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act.