In Brief
The appellant was convicted of possessing 47.37 kg of ganja (cannabis) allegedly found in a car during a police search. The case relied heavily on the testimony of the investigating officer, but two independent witnesses supposedly present at the search turned hostile and denied witnessing any proceedings. These witnesses provided a plausible explanation for their signatures on documents—they were at the police station for an unrelated matter and had signed blank documents. The Court found serious chronological impossibilities in the timeline and doubts about the fundamental legality of the search and seizure. Setting aside the conviction, the Court held that once such doubts arise about the search itself, the accused is entitled to benefit of the doubt, particularly as the co-accused was acquitted on identical facts."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.