Poppy Husk on a Bullock Cart: Supreme Court Restores NDPS Conviction as Section 50 Covers Only Personal Search

On 28.6.1987 a police party near Moga stopped a bullock cart; one respondent was driving it and the other two were sitting on the bags it carried (para 3). Two of them ran away and the driver was caught; 18 bags of poppy husk were recovered from the cart, and the two who fled were arrested in July 1989 (para 3). The trial court convicted them under Section 15 and sentenced each to ten years' imprisonment and a fine of one lakh rupees (paras 2, 4). The High Court acquitted them, holding that as they were sitting on the bags and two had run away, Section 50 had to be complied with (para 6). The State appealed (paras 7-8).

The Court set out Section 50 and held that a bare reading shows it applies only in the case of a personal search of a person; it does not extend to the search of a vehicle, a container, a bag or premises (paras 9-10). It referred to Kalema Tumba, Baldev Singh and Gurbax Singh, and said the language of Section 50 makes clear that the search must relate to a person, as contrasted with premises, vehicles or articles (para 10). This position was settled beyond doubt by the Constitution Bench in Baldev Singh, so the argument of non-compliance with Section 50 was without substance (para 10). A similar question had been examined in Madan Lal (para 11). The bags here were carried on a bullock cart, and the High Court's view that the accused sitting on them and the flight of two of them made Section 50 applicable could not stand (paras 6, 10). The High Court was therefore not justified in directing acquittal for the purported non-compliance with Section 50 (para 12). The Court also noted that one respondent had not appeared despite service of notice (para 8).