A court in Thane has acquitted a 31-year-old paan shop owner who spent 50 days in judicial custody on charges related to the possession and sale of banned tobacco products. The judgment, delivered after a three-year legal battle, highlighted significant procedural lapses and insufficient evidence in the prosecution's case, leading to the accused's release.
Three-Year Legal Battle Ends With Acquittal
The ordeal for the shop owner began on April 4, 2022, when the Anti-Narcotics Cell conducted a raid at his shop located in Kashimira Naka, Thane. During the operation, police claimed to have seized stock worth Rs 8,420, which included hundreds of sachets of various banned products and bundles of scented tobacco. The shop owner was arrested the next day, on April 5, 2022, and remained in custody until he was granted bail on May 25, 2022.
Critical Gaps in Investigation and Prosecution
The prosecution had levied serious charges against the accused under Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with administering poison or unwholesome drugs with intent to harm. However, the court found the case built by the investigators to be fundamentally flawed.
The judgment pointed out that the prosecution failed to establish essential elements of the charge. Crucially, no customers were present during the raid, and there was no evidence to prove that anyone had actually consumed the products from the shop. "The prosecution has utterly failed to prove that it was the accused who administered certain poison or stupefying intoxicating substance with intent to hurt the public at large," the court observed.
Procedural Failures That Doomed the Case
The court noted multiple investigative failures that proved fatal to the prosecution's case:
- The official food analysis report from the seized items was never submitted to the court.
- Independent panch witnesses, who are crucial for verifying the seizure process, were not examined.
- The court raised questions about whether the police officers involved were even competent to investigate matters under the specific Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
These lapses collectively undermined the credibility of the evidence presented. The court concluded that the prosecution could not prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the full acquittal of the accused, bringing a long and arduous legal process to an end.
