In Brief
The appellant was convicted under Sections 8 and 15 of the NDPS Act for possession of 10 kg of opium allegedly recovered from his house. The Supreme Court acquitted him, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the chain of custody linking the seized sample to the laboratory-tested substance. The court noted critical procedural breaches: no independent witnesses despite a residential locality, non-compliance with Section 50 (right to search before magistrate), and no recovery memo. The mere production of a laboratory report, without proof that it tested the actual seized sample, cannot sustain a conviction under the NDPS Act."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.