The Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case observed and has reiterated that drawing samples of seized narcotic substances is to be done strictly before a Magistrate and not at the time of seizure.
The court stated that section 52-A mandates that all narcotic substances seized by the investigating authority are to be sampled before Magistrate.
The bench headed by Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao in the case observed and has relied of the judgement passed in the case Simarnjit Singh vs. State of Punjab, wherein it has been explained by the Supreme Court that it is important to draw samples of seized narcotics only before a Magistrate, so that the Magistrate can certify the samples which will be used as primary evidence in the case.
Therefore, the Supreme Court had also noted that no provision in the statute provides for drawing of samples at the time of seizure.
In the present case, the High Court was hearing the bail application filed by the accused wherein it is contended that the investigating authority had not followed the procedure laid down under 52-A of the NDPS Act and sampled the apparent substances at the time of seizure.
The bench while applying the principle elicited by the Supreme Court to the present case noted that the accused or petitioner was in judicial custody since July 2023 and allowed his petition granting him bail.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that the petitioner is in judicial custody for more than four months. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/A.3.
The counsel, T.V. Jaggi Reddy appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, PP represented the respondent.
