In Brief
The appellant was convicted of possessing 59 kg of ganja under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and acquitted him. The Court held that while the NDPS Act imposes a reverse burden of proof on the accused, the prosecution must first establish a prima facie case with strict compliance to statutory requirements. Here, the actual seized material was never produced as evidence in court; panch witnesses turned hostile; and only police officers testified. The Court ruled that oral testimony from police alone, without production of the seized drug itself, cannot prove drug possession, and the accused must be given the benefit of doubt."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.