Spot Sampling Without Magistrate Not Fatal If Integrity Intact: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction for 23.5 kg Ganja

On 21.09.2019 police acting on secret information intercepted a two-wheeler carrying the appellant and her husband, informed them of their Section 50 rights, seized 23.500 kg of ganja, and drew and sealed two samples of about 50 g each at the spot (paras 3-4). Both were convicted under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 8(c) r/w 29(1) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a ₹1 lakh fine on each count, concurrently; the Madras High Court upheld this on 27.06.2024 (paras 1-2, 9-10). She pointed to the lack of independent witnesses, spot sampling, missing sample markings and a fall in sample weight (paras 12-15).

Non-examination of independent witnesses is not fatal where official witnesses are consistent and credible (Surinder Kumar, Jarnail Singh), and here their evidence was coherent on all material particulars (paras 21-22). Relying on Bharat Aambale, the Court held that non-compliance or delayed compliance with Section 52A is not fatal unless it affects the integrity of the seized substance or makes the prosecution doubtful (para 23). The samples were sealed with signatures at the spot, produced before the Magistrate and one sent for analysis under a judicial order; the seal was intact, the Magistrate's order identified the packets, and the chain of custody was continuous (paras 24-26). Any deviation from the ideal Section 52A procedure did not go to the root of the case, and Simranjit Singh and Yusuf were distinguishable as cases of broken seals and identity doubts (paras 27-28). The fall in sample weight from about 50 g to 40.6 g was explained by drying (Noor Aga) (paras 29-30). Conscious possession of a commercial quantity was proved, and the mandatory minimum sentence left no discretion despite her youth and minor child; remission is for the executive (paras 31-32).