The Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a taxi driver accused under the NDPS Act for transporting 20kg of ganja, highlighting procedural lapses and lack of evidence. The Court emphasized that taxi drivers are not obligated to verify passenger details and noted the contraband was in plain sight, not hidden. Acquitting the driver, the Bench stated, “No material links the appellant to the contraband,” discharging his bail bonds after seven years in prison.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Supreme Court of India overturned the conviction of a taxi driver under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
This decision nullifies earlier judgments by both the Trial Court and the High Court.
The Bench, consisting of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, stated,
“It was not expected of any taxi driver to give details of the passengers, as ordinarily, no taxi driver/owner before allowing the passenger to board the taxi ask for such details from the passenger(s). Moreover, no effort was made to search out the two passengers who may reveal the truth.”
ALSO READ: Giving Anticipatory Bail in NDPS Act Case ‘Very Serious Issue’ and ‘Unheard Of’: SC
Case Details:
The appellant, a taxi driver, had already served seven years and one month out of a 10-year sentence after being accused of transporting 20 kilograms of ganja in his taxi. The case dates back to June 3, 2010, when he was driving Tata India Car No. MH-10-E-3932.
The vehicle was stopped by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Dy.S.P.) in Belgaum, Karnataka. Upon being stopped, two passengers fled the scene, leaving behind two bags in the taxi. These bags, which were in plain view, were later confirmed to contain the illegal contraband.
The driver was arrested and prosecuted, but he consistently claimed ignorance about the contents of the bags, maintaining that they belonged to the passengers who had escaped.
Key Points Highlighted by the Court:
- No incriminating material was found on the appellant’s person.
- The contraband was not hidden but was in plain sight.
- Taxi drivers are not expected to collect personal details of their passengers.
- There was no evidence to suggest that the appellant was aware of the illegal contents in the bags.
The Court observed procedural lapses in the investigation, particularly the failure to trace or interrogate the passengers who had fled.
Furthermore, the Dy.S.P.’s statement confirmed that the appellant did not attempt to escape when the vehicle was stopped.
ALSO READ: NDPS Act| Six Men Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison for NDPS Act Violation in Kaushambi
The Bench remarked,
“Considering the fact that no incriminating material was seized from the person of the appellant and that he had not made any effort to run away; moreover, the two bags from which the contraband was seized were not found to be hidden but were rather visible, we find no material on record to link the appellant-driver with the aforesaid contraband so as to prosecute and convict him for any offence under the NDPS Act.”
Final Decision:
The Supreme Court set aside the judgments of both the Trial Court (dated June 1, 2011) and the High Court (dated November 27, 2012). The Bench ordered the discharge of the appellant’s bail bonds and sureties, stating,
“Accordingly, the order impugned passed by the High Court dated 27.11.2012 and that of the Trial Court dated 01.06.2011 are hereby set aside and the present appeal is allowed. The bail bonds and sureties stand discharged.”
CASE TITLE:
Sri Shankar Dongarisaheb Bhosale vs The State Of Karnataka [CRL. A. NO. 1221/2017]
APPEARANCE-
Petitioner: Advocates Manjunath Meled, Vijayalaxmi Udapudi, Anil Kumar (AOR)
Respondent: Advocates V. N. Raghupathy (AOR), Raghavendra M. Kulkarni, Mythili S, P. Ashok, Shiv Kumar, Vaishnavi
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on NDPS
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
