LexStreak
Read free →
Supreme Court of India· 16 September 2026

Do Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act apply where the accused is apprehended and searched in an open public place?

ABDUL RAJIK v. STATE OF M.P
2026 INSC 1001
Coram: Justice Sandeep Mehta · Justice Manmohan
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narc…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act do not apply where the accused is apprehended and searched in an open public place.

No. Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act do not apply where the accused is apprehended and searched in an open public place. Here, since the recovery was made from bags carried by the accused-appellants who were apprehended from an open public place, neither Section 42 nor Section 50 of the NDPS Act would apply to the search and seizure. (¶16)

Headnote

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s.52-A — Chain of custody — Link evidence — ss.42, 50 — FSL report — NDPS Act, 1985 — Chain of custody — Link evidence — Held: The prosecution cannot rely on an FSL report where an unexplained gap breaks the chain of custody of the seized samples. Safe and secure custody from seizure till receipt at the FSL must be proved by proper link evidence. (¶29, 30, 34) NDPS Act, 1985 — s.52-A — Non-compliance — Held further: Mere non-compliance with Section 52-A does not by itself vitiate the trial, but total non-compliance is a relevant factor in assessing whether the link evidence was proved. (¶31, 32, 33) NDPS Act, 1985 — ss.42, 50 — Open public place — Held further: Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act do not apply where the accused is apprehended and searched in an open public place. (¶16) FSL report — Essential ingredient — Held further: Once the FSL report is excluded, the recovered substance cannot be proved to be a narcotic drug without other admissible evidence. Appeals allowed; conviction and sentence set aside and the accused-appellants acquitted. (¶35, 37, 38, 39)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 16Suffice it to say that, as the recovery was made from bags being carried by the accused-appellants who were apprehended from an open public place, neither Section 42 nor Section 50 of the NDPS Act would apply to the search and seizure made by the Inspector/seizure officer (PW-7).
Acts & Sections
Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 8 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 42 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 52-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Section 2(iii)(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of ABDUL RAJIK v. STATE OF M.P — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Can the prosecution rely on an FSL report where an unexplained gap breaks the chain of custody of the seized samples?Does mere non-compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act by itself vitiate the trial or cause an automatic acquittal?Can the recovered substance be proved to be a narcotic drug without other admissible evidence once the FSL report is excluded?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections