IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2024 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NO. 7756 OF 2023)
MOHAMMED SAHEER @ SAHEER APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2024 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NO. 7757 OF 2023)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard Mr. Poornachandiram R., learned counsel appearing for
the appellant(s). The State of Kerala is represented by Mr. Alim
Anvar, learned counsel.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the
trial is vitiated as the search of the accused was not made before
a Magistrate and therefore there is violation of Section 50 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
4. On the above, paragraph 9 of the impugned judgment considers
the aforesaid contention by the accused. The Court opined that the
search was conducted by the Gazetted Officer (PW-3). The
evidence of PW-3 indicated that an option was given to both accused
to get themselves searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a
Magistrate. Both responded that they can be searched by the
Gazetted Officer (PW-3) and such consent was given in writing.
Those are marked as Ex.P/1 and Ex.P/2.
1
5. On the above aspect, we may also benefit by adverting to the
reasoning given in paragraph 8 in the Sessions Court’s judgment
(dated 28.02.2007) pertaining to search of the...