State of Kerala vs Sunil — 100648/2018
Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985\ Section 20(A),(i). Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 31st March 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: KLTV010030622018
Filing Number
101628/2018
Filing Date
19-05-2018
Registration No
100648/2018
Registration Date
19-05-2018
Court
District Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thiruvananthapuram
Judge
2-Adl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Thiruvananthapuram
Decision Date
31st March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
246
Police Station
Maranallor Police Station
Year
2017
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala
Adv. A.P.P
Respondent(s)
Sunil
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Adl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Thiruvananthapuram
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 31-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-03-2026 | Order/ Judgement |
| 19-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 12-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 05-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Thiruvananthapuram Sessions Court acquitted Sunil of cannabis cultivation charges under the NDPS Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove mandatory compliance with Sections 42 and 57 of the Act and failed to establish direct evidence of the accused's cultivation rather than plant possession. The court held that absence of proper procedural safeguards, coupled with the independent witness turning hostile and lack of proof regarding exclusive possession, rendered the prosecution's case insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Thiruvananthapuram Sessions Court acquitted Sunil of cannabis cultivation charges under the NDPS Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove mandatory compliance with Sections 42 and 57 of the Act and failed to establish direct evidence of the accused's cultivation rather than plant possession. The court held that absence of proper procedural safeguards, coupled with the independent witness turning hostile and lack of proof regarding exclusive possession, rendered the prosecution's case insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
More from this court
District Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Thiruvananthapuram All courts →Explore other courts