AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In this case the fact situation as found by the High Court is this: Four gunny bags of charas were seized by the authorities from the autorickshaw driven by the accused himself. When a plea is made on the strength of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 the focal question is whether the gunny bags were in the physical possession of the accused or not. If they were in the physical possession of the accused the mandate of Section 50 would apply. While considering this aspect our attention has been drawn to the decision rendered by a two-Judge Bench of this Court dated 15-9-1999 (in Criminal Appeal No. 807 of 1997) wherein the following observations have been made:
"WE do not find any substance in this contention as the charas was not found on the person of the appellants but it was found kept in a bag which was hanging on the scooter on which they were riding. Therefore, this was not a case where the person of the accused was searched and from his person narcotic drug or psychotropic substance was found. The correct position of the law on this point has been stated by this Court in State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the aforesaid observations are not consistent with the observations made by the three- Judge Bench in Namdi Francis Nwazor v. Union of India.
After considering the arguments for some time we are of the opinion that the question whether search of the person envisaged in Section 50 of the Act would encompass the gunny bags found inside the autorickshaw driven by the accused, so as to attract the mandatory requirements of that provision can be considered by a larger Bench of three Judges.
We, therefore, direct the Registry to place the matter for orders of the Hon''ble the Chief Justice of India.