HP High Court Upholds Acquittal in 2011 Drug Case... cited benefit of doubt as reason to favour the accused...

Shimla - The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has upheld the acquittal of Neelma Devi in a 2011 drug case.

The State of Himachal Pradesh had appealed against the decision made by the Special Judge in Kullu, which had cleared Devi of charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Case Background

On April 12, 2011, police officers claimed to have seen Neelma Devi acting suspiciously near Tilla Bridge.

They reported that she had thrown a black bag and attempted to flee.

The bag was later found to contain 2 kilograms of charas. However, Devi denied these accusations, stating that the police had fabricated the story after searching her home and finding nothing.

Trial and Acquittal

During the trial, the prosecution's case hinged on the testimony of police officers and two independent witnesses, Gautam Ram and Ses Ram.

However, both independent witnesses contradicted the police's account, stating that no drugs were found during a search of Devi's house.

The trial court found the testimonies of the police officers to be inconsistent and acquitted Devi on September 3, 2013.

State's Appeal

The State, represented by Additional Advocate General Vishwadeep Sharma, argued that the trial court had erred in its judgment by dismissing the police testimonies.

Sharma contended that the police had no reason to falsely implicate Devi and that the charas recovery was legitimate.

High Court's Decision

Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Rakesh Kainthla heard the appeal. After reviewing the case, they found no compelling reason to overturn the trial court's decision.

They noted that the independent witnesses did not support the prosecution's version and highlighted discrepancies in the police's account, including conflicting testimonies about where the investigation was conducted and the handling of evidence.

The High Court emphasized that an acquittal further strengthens the presumption of innocence, and unless the judgment of acquittal suffers from "patent perversity," it should not be disturbed.

The court concluded that the trial court's view was reasonable based on the evidence presented.

The High Court dismissed the State's appeal, affirming the trial court's decision to acquit Neelma Devi.

The judgment reinforces the principle that in criminal cases, the benefit of the doubt must go to the accused.