State vs NARENDRA @ KAMMU ETC. Advocate - Khushi Mohd. Pathan — 110/2018

Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8,15. Disposed: Contested--Acquitted on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Reg. Case - CR. REGULAR

CNR: RJBD080002702018

Filing Number

270/2018

Filing Date

15-Feb-2018

Registration No

110/2018

Registration Date

15-Feb-2018

Court

ACJM JM K Patan Taluka

Judge

1-Jm

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted

Last updated 05-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

385

Police Station

K.Patan

Year

2017

Acts & Sections

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Section 8,15

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State

    Adv. PROSECUTION OFFICER

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NARENDRA @ KAMMU ETC. Advocate - Khushi Mohd. Pathan

  2. 2.RAMNARAYAN

    Adv. K.M.P.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The court acquitted both defendants (Narendra Urf Kummu and Ramaniarayan) of charges under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, giving them the benefit of doubt. Although police evidence suggested 496 grams of suspected heroin were recovered from their motorcycle on September 21, 2017, the court found critical procedural violations—specifically the failure to follow mandatory procedures under Section 50 NDPS Act (obtaining an independent witness before personal search)—which fatally weakened the prosecution's case and rendered the seizure legally questionable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Jm

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Final arguments

    Jm

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  6. 27-Mar-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  9. 16-Jan-2026

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  10. 10-Nov-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  11. 08-Aug-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  12. 20-Jun-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  13. 28-May-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  14. 16-Apr-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  15. 25-Feb-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  16. 23-Jan-2025

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  17. 08-Nov-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  18. 26-Sep-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  19. 29-Aug-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  20. 29-Jul-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  21. 10-Jul-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  22. 27-Jun-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  23. 03-Jun-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  24. 01-May-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  25. 04-Mar-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  26. 13-Feb-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  27. 25-Jan-2024

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  28. 21-Dec-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  29. 28-Nov-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  30. 21-Oct-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  31. 19-Sep-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  32. 25-Aug-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  33. 19-Jul-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  34. 13-Jun-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  35. 02-May-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  36. 05-Apr-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  37. 08-Mar-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  38. 01-Feb-2023

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  39. 17-Dec-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  40. 10-Nov-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  41. 19-Sep-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  42. 29-Jul-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  43. 09-Jun-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Jm

  44. 28-Mar-2022

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  45. 26-Nov-2021

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  46. 28-Jul-2021

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  47. 31-Mar-2021

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  48. 16-Jan-2021

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  49. 03-Sep-2020

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  50. 12-May-2020

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  51. 24-Feb-2020

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  52. 28-Nov-2019

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  53. 30-Oct-2019

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  54. 14-Jun-2019

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  55. 06-Feb-2019

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  56. 01-Aug-2018

    Prosecution Evidence

    Acjm

  57. 05-Mar-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  58. 15-Feb-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. 110/2018

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The court acquitted both defendants (Narendra Urf Kummu and Ramaniarayan) of charges under Section 8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, giving them the benefit of doubt. Although police evidence suggested 496 grams of suspected heroin were recovered from their motorcycle on September 21, 2017, the court found critical procedural violations—specifically the failure to follow mandatory procedures under Section 50 NDPS Act (obtaining an independent witness before personal search)—which fatally weakened the prosecution's case and rendered the seizure legally questionable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case