Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 18- Findings of the trial court cannot be distorted conclusions The findings of the trial court cannot be said to be 'distorted conclusions' warranting interference. Based on the oral evidence of Joginder Singh (PW-2) and Harbhajan Singh (PW-3), the High Court ought not to have interfered with the order of acquittal and the conviction of the appellant under Section 18 of the NDPS Act cannot be sustained. The conviction of the appellant under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him is set aside and this appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted of the charge. ......Mohinder Singh VS State of Punjab, [5 LM (SC) 83]
Section 20- The prosecution has failed to establish the commission of alleged offence by the accused- respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence is scanty and lacking support to establish that the contraband was really recovered from the possession of the respondents in the manner alleged by the prosecution on the said date and time. Explained circumstances, the prosecution story cannot be believed to award conviction to the accused- respondents. They deserve benefit of doubt. We are, therefore, in complete agreement with the view taken by the High Court and see no reason to interfere with the order impugned herein......State of Himachal Pradesh =VS= Trilok Chand, [4 LM (SC) 118]
