Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

21 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

STATE OF PUNJABversusGURNAM @ GAMA ETC.

2025 INSC 96030 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were convicted under the NDPS Act for transporting 750 kg of poppy husk after a seizure in 2009. They appealed their convictions, and the High Court acquitted them, relying solely on the principle from Mohan Lal v. State of Punjab that an informant cannot also be the investigator. The State of Punjab ch

NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAUversusLAKHWINDER SINGH

2025 INSC 19029 January 2025Dismissed

The Narcotic Control Bureau appealed against a High Court order that suspended the ten‑year rigorous imprisonment sentence of Lakhwinder Singh, convicted under the NDPS Act, and granted him bail pending appeal after he had served 4½ years. The issue was whether the appellate court could grant such relief when the convi

MANOJ TEJRAJ JAINversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

2025 INSC 109028 August 2025Disposed off

The case arose from a raid on a godown in Ahmedabad where 55 boxes containing 1,364 kg of ephedrine, a controlled substance under the NDPS (Regulation of Controlled Substances) Order 2013, were seized. Four appellants were convicted under Sections 25A and 29 of the NDPS Act based largely on the confessional statement o

UNION OF INDIA THR. I.O. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUversusMAN SINGH VERMA

2025 INSC 29228 February 2025Case Partly allowed

The Narcotics Control Bureau seized a large quantity of alleged heroin from Man Singh Verma, who was arrested and placed in judicial custody. After two laboratory tests returned negative results, the Special Judge ordered his release on 10 April 2023. Despite his release, the Allahabad High Court entertained a pending

V. SENTHIL BALAJIversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 73926 September 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The former Tamil Nadu Transport Minister V. Senthil Balaji was arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for alleged involvement in a large‑scale job‑racketeering scheme, with the Enforcement Directorate filing a complaint under Section 3 of the PMLA punishable under Section 4. The High Court rejecte

KHURSHEED AHMAD CHOHANversusUNION OF TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS. ETC.

2025 INSC 87621 July 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a police constable, was summoned to the Senior Superintendent's office and allegedly detained illegally for six days during which he suffered severe genital mutilation and other injuries, as confirmed by medical reports. His wife complained to the police seeking registration of an FIR against the officia

KUSHA DURUKAversusSTATE OF ODISHA

2024 INSC 4619 January 2024Dismissed

Kusha Duruka, accused under the NDPS Act, filed multiple bail applications after his arrest on 3 February 2022. The first bail request was rejected by the Sessions Court, and a subsequent application before the Odisha High Court was also dismissed, while his co‑accused was granted bail. During the pendency of a Special

NARAYAN DASversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 87217 July 2025Dismissed

Narayan Das was convicted under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act for possession of 236 vials of codeine‑phosphate cough syrups and was sentenced to twelve years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,00,000. The High Court, while dismissing his appeal, reduced the term to ten years, the statutory minimum, on the groun

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCEversusRAJ KUMAR ARORA & ORS.

2025 INSC 49817 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence investigated the illegal possession, manufacture and sale of Buprenorphine Hydrochloride, a psychotropic substance listed in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but not in Schedule I of the NDPS Rules, leading to charges under Sections 8(c), 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act against several res

RAKESH KUMAR RAGHUVANSHIversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2025 INSC 9616 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Rakesh Kumar Raghuvanshi, was intercepted on a train carrying three cartons later found to contain 50 kg of opium poppy husk. He claimed he was unaware of the cartons and had only complied with police directions to exit the coach. The trial court, relying on the seizure and the appellant's inability to e

KAILAS S/O BAJIRAO PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2025 INSC 111715 September 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Kailas and co-accused were convicted under the NDNDPS Act for possession of 39 kg of ganja seized during a police raid, with the trial court relying on a video recording of the raid and a chemical examiner's report. The High Court set aside the convictions and ordered a re‑trial, holding that the video wa

BHARTI ARORAversusTHE STATE OF HARYANA

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 104413 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a former Superintendent of Police, was implicated by a Special Judge for allegedly fabricating a false story that led to the recovery of opium and was issued a show‑cause notice under Section 58 of the NDPS Act. The Special Judge recorded adverse findings against her and other officers without giving the

JOTHI @ NAGAJOTHIversusTHE STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2025 INSC 141711 December 2025Dismissed

The appellant Jothi @ Nagajothi and her husband were intercepted by police who seized 23.5 kg of ganja and seized cash, drawing two samples (S-1 and S-2) at the spot and forwarding one for forensic analysis. The trial court convicted them under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 8(c) r/w 29(1) of the NDPS Act, imposing

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 40010 May 2024

Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested on 21 March 2024 by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with alleged offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and related statutes. He challenged the arrest before the Supreme Court, arguing that the legality of his detention was sub judic

BHARAT AAMBALEversusTHE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2025 INSC 786 January 2025Dismissed

The appellant was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act for possession of ganja and appealed on the ground that the trial was vitiated by non‑compliance with Section 52A, which governs inventory, sampling and magistrate certification of seized narcotics. The Supreme Court examined the legislative purpose

BISHWAJIT DEYversusTHE STATE OF ASSAM

2025 INSC 326 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Bishwajit Dey, owned a truck that was stopped at a police checkpoint in Assam where two soap boxes containing 24.8 g of heroin were discovered. The drug was found in the vehicle but the charge‑sheet named only a third‑party occupant, Md Dimpul Ali, as the accused; the owner and driver were not alleged to

NADEEM AHAMEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2025 INSC 9935 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Nadee m Ahamed was seized with approximately 125 g of heroin while a co‑accused was found with about 130 g, leading the trial court to treat the combined 255 g as a commercial quantity and convict both under Sections 21(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The appellant challenged the conviction on grounds that the

JOYI KITTY JOSEPHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2025 INSC 3275 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The wife of a man detained under the COFEPOSA Act challenged his preventive detention, arguing that the detaining authority had not applied its mind and had ignored the stringent bail conditions imposed by the magistrate. The Supreme Court examined the factual matrix, which showed the detainee’s involvement in a large‑

THE STATE OF JHARKHANDversusSUNNY KUMAR @ SUNNY KUMAR SAO

2025 INSC 1532 February 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Jharkhand appealed against a High Court order that granted bail to Sunny Kumar, who was charged under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. After being released on bail, the accused was arrested again on 12 July 2023 for a similar NDPS offence, and the trial in the origin

MOHAMMED KHALID AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF TELANGANA

2024 INSC 1581 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were charged under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act for allegedly transporting about 80 kg of ganja seized from a vehicle. The prosecution relied on a seizure panchnama, samples sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and confessions recorded by police officers, but failed to

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search