Section 50 NDPS Breach in Personal Search Does Not Taint Vehicle Recovery, Supreme Court Holds; Dilip Not Correct

On 19 August 2009, a police party on patrol at the Sirhind bypass, Rajpura, stopped a Qualis whose driver tried to reverse on seeing them (para 3). The driver, Baljinder Singh, and Khushi Khan, who was with him, consented to be searched by the officer; seven bags of poppy husk, each weighing 34 kg, were recovered from the vehicle, while their personal search yielded nothing (paras 3-4). The Special Court, Patiala convicted both under Section 15 of the NDPS Act and sentenced them to 12 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2 lakh each (para 5). The High Court acquitted them, holding that the personal search violated Section 50 (para 6).

The question was whether a Section 50 violation in the personal search entitles the accused to acquittal even for contraband recovered from the vehicle (para 10). Section 50 protects a person in a "personal search", and contraband so recovered can be relied on only after strict compliance (para 12). Relying on Baldev Singh and Vijaysinh Chandubha Jadeja, the Court held that an article seized in a personal search violating Section 50 cannot by itself prove unlawful possession (paras 13-14). Following Ajmer Singh, the mandate of Section 50 is confined to personal search and does not extend to a vehicle, container or premises (paras 15-16). Conclusion (3) in Baldev Singh bars a conviction based only on such a recovery, but other evidence can be looked into (para 17). Since the vehicle search and recovery stood proved, no benefit could be extended to invalidate that recovery (para 17). Dilip, which gave the accused the benefit even for a vehicle recovery, "is not correct and is opposed to the law laid down by this Court in Baldev Singh" (para 18).