Samples Drawn at Spot Without Magistrate: Rajasthan High Court Acquits Two in Tramadol Case for Section 52A Breach

On 26.03.2020, during the Covid lockdown, police at Bilochia village caught Premchand fleeing from a shop with a plastic bag holding Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets weighing 1 kg 100 g; he named the second appellant as his supplier, though nothing was recovered from him (paras 2-3). Samples were taken from the tablets at the spot, and FIR No. 68/2020 was registered under Sections 8 and 22 (para 3). On 07.02.2024 the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Raisinghnagar convicted Premchand under Section 8/22 and the second appellant under Section 8/29, sentencing each to 14 years' rigorous imprisonment and a Rs 1,50,000 fine (para 1).

It was undisputed that Section 52A had not been complied with (para 12). Relying on Mangilal, the Court noted that Section 52A is a mandatory rule of evidence requiring a Magistrate's physical presence, and that without his certification an inventory, photograph or list of samples is not primary evidence (para 13). Mohanlal requires samples to be drawn in the Magistrate's presence and under his supervision, and in Bothilal sampling before the contraband was forwarded was accepted as raising grave suspicion (paras 14-15). Here search, seizure and sampling all took place at the spot without a Magistrate, a flagrant violation for which the case was fit to be discarded on its own (para 16). Only police officials of the raiding team witnessed the search, and none named anyone who had declined to be a witness (paras 17-18). The trial judge failed to consider these lapses (para 19). The samples were sent to the FSL on 09.04.2020, though guideline 13 of the 1988 notification requires dispatch within 72 hours, raising a doubt of tampering (para 20).