The Supreme Court delivered its verdict in the criminal appeals related to an NDPS Act conviction from Gujarat, resulting in a split outcome. While the appellant Anwarkhan had his conviction upheld, Firdoskhan was acquitted due to procedural inconsistencies and insufficient evidence linking him directly to the crime. The Court emphasized the lack of an independent identification of Firdoskhan and deemed the evidence against him insufficient. The search and seizure process, conducted under public scrutiny, was free from error in Anwarkhan's case. However, the court found fault in the reliance on Section 67 confessional statements, in line with the Tofan Singh judgment, leading to Firdoskhan's acquittal.

1. Case Background
   This case involves a narcotics seizure at a public bus stand in Gujarat. Both Anwarkhan and Firdoskhan were arrested for possession and trafficking of heroin under the NDPS Act after a raid by the Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB) in 2003.

2. Secret Information and Raid Setup
   The raid was conducted after receiving secret information about two men delivering contraband. NCB officials conducted surveillance and apprehended Anwarkhan with a polythene bag containing 2 kg of heroin. Firdoskhan escaped the scene but was later traced and brought into custody.

3. Charges and Initial Conviction
   The trial court convicted both accused under Sections 21, 8(c), and 29 of the NDPS Act for trafficking narcotics. Both were sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine.

4. Appeal and Contentions
   On appeal, Anwarkhan challenged procedural lapses, including the non-compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, and raised doubts over the independent witnesses. Firdoskhan's appeal hinged on the fact that he was not apprehended on-site, and the identification process was dubious.

5. Supreme Court's Analysis

   • Anwarkhan's Conviction Upheld: The Supreme Court affirmed the validity of the seizure and the testimonies of the NCB officials in Anwarkhan's case, dismissing his appeal.
   • Firdoskhan's Acquittal: The Court noted procedural lapses in Firdoskhan’s arrest and identification, coupled with the inadmissibility of statements made under Section 67 of the NDPS Act per Tofan Singh v. Tamil Nadu.

6. Ruling

   • Anwarkhan to serve the remainder of his sentence.
   • Firdoskhan acquitted due to lack of direct evidence and procedural irregularities.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
  • Section 21: Punishment for possessing narcotic drugs.
  • Section 8(c): Prohibition on certain operations such as production, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase, transport, warehousing, use, consumption, import inter-State, export inter-State of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances.
  • Section 29: Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy.
  • Section 42: Power of entry, search, seizure, and arrest without warrant or authorization.
  • Section 50: Conditions under which the search of persons shall be conducted.
  • Section 67: Power to call for information and to summon persons for giving evidence.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Admissibility of Section 67 Confessions: The Supreme Court followed the precedent set by the Tofan Singh case, ruling that confessional statements made to NCB officers under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are not admissible as evidence against the accused.
• Lack of Independent Identification: The Court questioned the reliability of Firdoskhan's identification, as no Test Identification Parade (TIP) was conducted and the first-time identification occurred in court after a significant delay.

Subjects:

NDPS Act Violation, Criminal Appeal, Procedural Lapses, Confessional Statements, Search and Seizure

Narcotics, Confession, Procedural Lapse, Criminal Appeal