Anwarkhan vs. State of Gujarat: NDPS Act Compliance Case

In the case of Anwarkhan vs. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court delivered a crucial judgment regarding compliance with the NDPS Act. The case involved Anwarkhan as the petitioner against the State of Gujarat. The verdict has far-reaching implications on the interpretation and application of drug-related laws. Find out more about the details and implications of this landmark judgment.

Facts

• Anwarkhan was apprehended at ST Bus Stand based on secret information received by Deepak Pareek.
• Anwarkhan(A-1) was carrying a bag containing suspected contraband materials when arrested.
• Vikram Ratnu took over the investigation after Anwarkhan’s arrest.
• Firdoskhan managed to escape initially but was later tracked down and brought for investigation.
• Charges were framed against both Anwarkhan and Firdoskhan for drug-related offenses.
• The contraband substance was found to be brown sugar/heroin and Diacetyl Morphine contents.
• The samples were sent for analysis to confirm the presence of illicit substances.
• The raiding team split into groups to apprehend the suspects and handle the situation at the bus stand.
• Both Anwarkhan and Firdoskhan denied the allegations during questioning under CrPC Section 313.
• The case was transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge in Nadiad for trial.
• The trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants on June 6, 2006.
• The High Court of Gujarat rejected the appeals by the appellants on November 30, 2009.

Also Read: A Case of Culpable Homicide: The Appeal of Kariman vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Arguments

• The appellants argued that the seizure procedure was not followed properly as per Section 42 of the NDPS Act.
• Violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act was claimed as the option to be searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer was not given.
• The panch witness Manubhai(PW-1) from the Income Tax Department was deemed reliable by the appellants.
• The identification of accused Firdoskhan(A-2) in court without a Test Identification Parade was questioned.
• The appellants claimed that the narcotic drugs were planted on them as per the deposition of witness Vikram Ratnu(PW-3).
• The statements of the accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were requested to be omitted from consideration.
• The contention that non-compliance of Section 42(2) vitiates the search and seizure is rejected as Section 43 of the NDPS Act applies to search and seizure from a public place.
• The argument regarding non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act is also rejected as the seizure was not during personal search of the appellant Anwar Khan(A-1) and an independent panch witness was present.
• The claim that search and seizure proceedings are vitiated due to non-compliance of mandatory procedure under Section 42 of the NDPS Act is dismissed.

Also Read: Acquittal of Accused Appellant in the State Of M.P. v. Hansraj : Lack of Evidence Leads to Overturning of Conviction

Analysis

• The deferment of formal arrest of Anwarkhan(A-1) was possibly to record his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act and avoid Article 20(3) issues.
• The identification of Firdoskhan(A-2) by Vikram Ratnu(PW-3) is deemed untrustworthy and unreliable, casting doubt on the sanctity of the statement.
• Confessional statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible as evidence, as per the Tofan Singh case.
• Lack of documentation regarding Firdoskhan(A-2)’s apprehension at Shah Jahan Pur Police Station raised doubts.
• Evidence chain for the seizure of narcotics was well-established, but the identification of Firdoskhan(A-2) raised doubts due to inconsistency and lack of clarity.
• Witness discrepancies were addressed, supporting the seizure of narcotics but casting doubt on Firdoskhan(A-2)’s involvement.
• The prosecution successfully proved Anwarkhan(A-1)’s guilt, but the case against Firdoskhan(A-2) lacked conclusive evidence.
• The sequence of events surrounding Firdoskhan(A-2)’s identification and apprehension was questionable, impacting the reliability of the confession.
• The prosecution failed to substantiate the charges against Firdoskhan(A-2) based on the confessional statement.
• Seizure of narcotics from Anwarkhan(A-1) was proven beyond doubt, with proper procedure followed, despite the deferred arrest and lack of Section 50 NDPS Act compliance.
• No contraband substance was found in the possession of appellant Firdoskhan(A-2).
• Evidence of Vikram Ratnu(PW-3) claiming to have identified Firdoskhan(A-2) is deemed unreliable and lacks corroboration from independent evidence.
• Therefore, the evidence of Vikram Ratnu(PW-3) regarding the identification of Firdoskhan(A-2) is to be discarded.

Also Read: Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar vs. State of Karnataka

Decision

• Anwarkhan’s appeal (A-1) is dismissed as lacking merit.
• Anwarkhan’s bail bonds are cancelled.
• Anwarkhan’s conviction by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court is quashed and set aside.
• Anwarkhan is acquitted of all charges.
• Anwarkhan, who is on bail, does not need to surrender and his bail bonds are discharged.
• Anwarkhan must surrender before the trial Court within 30 days to serve the remaining part of the sentence, or the trial Court will take steps to apprehend him.
• Firdoskhan’s appeal (A-2) is allowed.

Case Title: FIRDOSKHAN KHURSHIDKHAN Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT (2024 INSC 351)

Case Number: Crl.A. No.-002044-002044 – 2010

Click here to read/download original judgement