JEEHAND vs State S — 2025 SCMR 923 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

JEEHAND VS State S. 9(c)---Police Rules, 1934, R. 22.70, Register No. XIX---Recovery of narcotic substance---Re-appraisal of evidence---Safe custody and transmission of case property---Collective forensic report of all samples---Accused was arrested for recovery of 100 packets of charas, weighing 100 grams each---Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused to imprisonment for life---Validity---Safe custody and safe transmission of alleged drug from the spot of recovery till its receipt by Narcotic Testing Laboratory were not satisfactorily established---It was mandated in Police Rules, 1934 that case property must be kept in Malkhana and entry of the same must be recorded in Register No. XIX of that police station---It was duty of police and prosecution to establish that case property was kept in safe custody, and if required to be sent to any laboratory for analysis, to further establish its safe transmission and also record it in the relevant register, including road certificate etc.---Procedure in Police Rules, 1934 ensured that case property, when it was produced before Court, had remained in safe custody and was not tampered with until that time---Complete mechanism was provided in Police Rules, 1934 regarding safe custody and safe transmission of case property to concerned laboratory and then to Trial Court---Each sample was to be tested separately and individual reports must be prepared for each sample---Collective forensic report not only diminished credibility of chemical examination but also raised serious questions regarding representative nature of samples sent for analysis---In the present case. there were serious procedural violations, absence of credible forensic evidence and failure to establish safe custody and transmission---Supreme Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused as prosecution could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and accused was acquitted of the charge---Appeal was allowed.

JEEHAND vs State S — 2025 SCMR 923 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR