The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the conviction of a Russian national who had been sentenced to 10 years in prison for allegedly smuggling charas into India from Nepal. The top court found serious lapses in the search, seizure, and arrest process, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Sanjay Kumar.
Read Also:- Kerala High Court Quashes Suicide Abetment Case, Says Angry Words Alone Don’t Prove Criminal
Background of the Case
The case arose from a 2016 incident near the Indo-Nepal border. According to the prosecution, Doniyar Vildanov, a Russian citizen, was intercepted near Border Pillar No. 517/2 by personnel of the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB).
The police claimed that 1.9 kilograms of charas was recovered from his bag during a search. He was later booked under Sections 8, 20 and 23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced by a trial court to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹1 lakh.
The Allahabad High Court had earlier upheld the conviction, prompting the accused to approach the Supreme Court.
Read Also:-Delhi High Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Defamation Suit Against Netflix Show ‘Ba*ds
What the Accused Argued
The defence challenged the prosecution story on multiple grounds. It was argued that:
- The accused was detained a day earlier in “no man’s land” near the border.
- The recovery was falsely planted after he refused to bribe officials.
- Mandatory legal safeguards under the NDPS Act were not followed.
- His passport showed exit from Nepal on November 5, 2016, but no entry stamp into India was recorded.
The defence also pointed out that the accused was produced before the magistrate beyond the permissible time and that his pet dog, which accompanied him, was mysteriously taken away.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court closely examined the evidence of prosecution witnesses and found serious inconsistencies.
The Bench noted that the SSB team had already checked the bag before informing the accused of his legal right to be searched in the presence of a magistrate or gazetted officer - a mandatory safeguard under the NDPS Act.
“The sequence of events clearly shows that the bag was searched first and the formalities were completed later,” the court observed.
The judges also found fault with the so-called consent letter. Though the police claimed it was explained to the accused, it was written in English and bore only his signature, without signatures of any officer or independent witness.
Read Also:- UGC's 2026 Anti-Discrimination Rules Face Protest by Lawyers Near Allahabad High Court
The court further noted that:
- The passport did not show entry into India despite claims of arrest inside Indian territory.
- The recovery memo did not even mention the bag from which the contraband was allegedly seized.
- The presence and disappearance of the accused’s pet dog raised further doubts about the prosecution story.
“These are not minor inconsistencies. They strike at the very root of the prosecution case,” the Bench remarked.
Final Decision
Setting aside the judgments of the trial court and the High Court, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
“The mandatory procedure under the NDPS Act was not followed in its true spirit,” the court said while allowing the appeal.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside Odisha Land Dispute Orders, Says Section 47 CPC Misused After Decree
The Bench ordered that:
- The conviction and sentence be quashed
- The accused be released immediately, if not required in any other case
- His passport be returned through proper procedure
With this, the criminal appeal was allowed and the accused was acquitted of all charges.
Case Title: Doniyar Vildanov v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Case No.: Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 9460 of 2025
Decision Date: January 30, 2026
