he Supreme Court has acquitted Abdul Rajik and Govind in an NDPS case after finding serious gaps in the handling, identification and custody of the samples allegedly recovered from them. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain connecting the seized substance with the samples examined by the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL).
A Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Manmohan delivered the judgment on September 16, 2026.
Background
According to the prosecution, on November 29, 2004, police received information that two persons were carrying charas in bags near Bandariya Tiraha in Jabalpur. A police team reached the location and allegedly recovered 1 kilogram of suspected charas from Abdul Rajik and 800 grams from Govind.
Samples were drawn and sent to the FSL, Sagar, which reported that the samples were charas. The trial court convicted Abdul Rajik under Section 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1 lakh. Govind was convicted under Section 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) and sentenced to eight years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 80,000.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the convictions in 2010, following which both accused approached the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court focused particularly on the evidence concerning the samples. The seizure officer had stated that representative samples of 25 grams each were drawn. However, the Court found that the evidence did not establish whether the sample packets themselves carried identifiable signatures, thumb impressions or other marks connecting them to the seized material.
The Court also noted that the prosecution failed to establish what happened to the samples after they were deposited in the police station's storage facility and before they reached the FSL.
A significant discrepancy concerned the dates. The forwarding letter was dated December 1, 2004, while the FSL report showed that the samples were received on December 6, 2004. The prosecution did not explain where the samples remained during those five days, and the constable said to have carried them was not examined.
The Court further found that there was total non-compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act concerning the drawing of representative samples in the presence of a Magistrate.
The Bench clarified that every procedural lapse under Section 52-A does not automatically result in acquittal. However, in the present case, the sampling deficiencies were accompanied by a complete break in the evidence showing safe custody and movement of the samples.
The Court observed:
“the link evidence has been totally breached leading total collapse of the sanctity and integrity of the samples.”
The Supreme Court held that once the FSL report was excluded, there was no legally admissible evidence sufficient to establish that the recovered substance was charas under the NDPS Act.
The Court also rejected reliance on the seizure officer's claim that the substance had been identified as charas merely by burning a portion of it, noting the absence of scientific material supporting such identification.
Holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the identity of the substance, the Supreme Court set aside the convictions and sentences imposed by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court. Abdul Rajik and Govind were acquitted, and since they were already on bail, they were not required to surrender.
Their bail bonds were discharged.
