Supreme Court of India Judgements

47260 Judgements hosted as on 24/05/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Narcotics

Narcotics

Recovery of huge quantity (3332 kgs.) of ‘Ganja’ (cannabis) carried on truck – Appellant was helper of truck – He was only 22/23 years of age at the time of incident and first time offender – Nothing was recovered from his custody – appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone,

Apr 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M. SAMPAT — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATISGARH — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Narcotics

(NDPS) – Ss 8(c) and 20(b) – Recovery of 6.300 kilogram ganja – Quantum of sentence – When the quantity/Ganja recovered from the appellant was 6.300 kilogram, which is between small quantity and commercial quantity HELD to the extent of imposing the sentence of six years rigorous imprisonment in place of ten years rigorous imprisonment

Dec 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ISSAK NABAB SHAH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ.…

Narcotics

Officers under Section 53 of NDPS Act are police; statement under Section 67 is confessional statement: Supreme Court in 2:1 judgment The Court noted that given the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act, they have to be construed bearing in mind the fact that the severer the punishment, the greater the care.

Oct 30, 2020 sclaw

The Supreme Court has held by a 2:1 majority that officers under Section 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 are police officers (Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil…

Narcotics

N D P S Act, 1985 – Ss 20(b)(ii)(B) & 50 – Possession 20 kg – Ganja from the motor cycle – NDPS Trial is not vitiated merely because ownership of Vehicle from which Contraband was seized is not established – It is enough to establish and prove that the contraband articles were found from the accused from the vehicle purchased by the accused

Sep 10, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RIZWAN KHAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ.…

You missed

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 32 — Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Sections 154, 173 — Clubbing/Transfer of FIRs — Multiple FIRs registered against petitioners in different jurisdictions arising from same set of transactions relating to a real estate project — Held, multiplicity of FIRs and parallel investigations on same facts leads to avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings and serious prejudice to the accused — Principle laid down in T.T — Antony v — State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 181, that there cannot be multiple FIRs for the same occurrence or transaction, squarely applies — FIR No. 30/2019 (EOW, Delhi) directed to be transferred and clubbed with FIR No. 439/2024 (Gurugram, Haryana) for investigation — Blanket direction restraining coercive steps in future FIRs declined, but petitioners permitted to avail remedies in law if future FIRs are based on the same transaction.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Cr P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Abuse of Process of Court — Discharge of Accused — Vague Allegations — Where allegations in FIR and charge sheet are general and do not specify the role of the accused, continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of court and may cause prejudice.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 2(2), Order 20 Rule 18 — Preliminary vs. Final Decree — A Preliminary Decree declares rights and liabilities, leaving actual results to be worked out in further proceedings — A Final Decree is passed after further inquiries, completely disposing of the suit — A Preliminary Decree cannot be executed directly unless it is partly final — Provisions of Order 20 Rule 18 allow a court to pass a Preliminary Decree declaring rights and giving further directions if partition cannot be conveniently made without further inquiry in suits for partition of immovable property — The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred by focusing on the nomenclature of the decree rather than its executable portions, especially when the property was not divisible by metes and bounds.

May 24, 2026 sclaw
Constitution Narcotics Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — Section 43-D(5) — Bail — Constitutional Courts’ power to grant bail — The Supreme Court reiterated that statutory restrictions on bail under the UAP Act do not oust the power of constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of fundamental rights, particularly the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution — The Court emphasized that the rigors of Section 43-D(5) can “melt down” when there is no likelihood of trial completion within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration is substantial.

May 24, 2026 sclaw