In Brief
The appellant was convicted under the NDPS Act for possessing 10 kg of opium. The Supreme Court acquitted him because the prosecution failed to conclusively prove that the sample tested in the laboratory was identical to the material seized from him. The Court held that while the NDPS Act imposes a reverse burden on the accused, the prosecution must first establish a prima facie case beyond reasonable doubt. Mere production of a laboratory report is insufficient; the seized sample and tested sample must be correlated. The Court also found non-compliance with Section 50 (no independent witnesses, no proper recovery memo) and noted that defective malkhana procedures undermined sample identity. The appeal was allowed and the appellant acquitted."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.