6 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Mar 17, 2026 01:57 PM ISTThe Tripura High Court noted that the witnesses were on election duty. (AI-generated image)Tripura High Court news: The Tripura High Court recently set aside the acquittal order of an accused caught with 82 kilogram of dry ganja (marijuana), noting that the state was not granted an adequate opportunity to secure the attendance of the witnesses as they were on election duty. Justice T Amarnath Goud and S Datta Purkayastha also took note of submissions that around 150 cases were decided within a short span of time by the trial court, all resulting in acquittals, raising serious concerns about the conduct of prosecution in those matters.“Witnesses could not appear on certain dates as they were reportedly engaged in official duties, including election duty. It is seen from the record that without granting an adequate opportunity to the prosecution to secure the attendance of the witnesses,” the Tripura High Court said in its March 11 order. The bench was hearing the plea of the state challenging the acquittal of an accused, Golom Rabban Ali, under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. ‘150 cases decided in short span’The high court noted that the public prosecutor, R Datta, has pointed out that about 150 cases were decided within a short span of time, and all resulted in acquittal. It was also mentioned that when an enquiry was made with the said public prosecutor of the trial court, he tendered his resignation. It was submitted by the public prosecutor that due to lapses in properly conducting the matters, the State had serious doubts regarding his integrity and his resignation was accordingly obtained.Also Read | Humanitarian considerations can’t override law: Supreme Court upholds woman’s conviction in NDPS caseThe high court noted the arguments of the public prosecutor, the state has preferred several appeals, and the present case is one such appeal where the interference of this court is warranted, as there appears to be a gross violation of the law in proceeding with the trial without affording an adequate opportunity to the prosecution. He further claimed that there was no necessity to dispose of the matter within such a short period.Public Prosecutor further argued that the trial court committed a serious error in closing the prosecution’s evidence without granting a reasonable opportunity to the prosecution to produce the witnesses. It was contended that the summons issued to the prosecution witnesses had not been duly served, and the service reports were not received. It was further submitted that the witnesses could not appear on certain dates due to official engagements, including election duty. It is argued that the trial court should have afforded a reasonable opportunity to the prosecution, particularly in a case involving the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband under the NDPS Act.‘Witnesses on election duty’It was noted that the prosecution witnesses could not appear on certain dates as they were reportedly engaged in official duties, including election duty. The high court noted that the evidence placed on record suggests that the trial court proceeded to close the prosecution’s evidence and ultimately acquitted the accused without granting adequate opportunity to the prosecution to secure the attendance of the witnesses.In a case involving serious allegations under the NDPS Act and recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband, the prosecution should have been given a reasonable opportunity to adduce evidence. The said judgment of the trial court was passed prematurely, and the matter deserves to be remanded to the trial court for a fresh trial after affording a reasonable opportunity to the prosecution.The matter is remanded back to the trial court concerned with a direction to conduct a fresh trial by allowing the prosecution to prove the relevant documents in support of the prosecution’s case, allowing the accused to conduct the defence properly. However, it is made clear that if the parties want to rely upon the earlier evidence placed on record, in that case, the trial court may examine the remaining witnesses after hearing both sides, affording reasonable opportunities to the parties. The trial should be conducted as expeditiously as possible. The accused is directed to surrender before the trial court on or before March 31, 2026.The trial court may consider a bail application if so filed, so that the accused’s right is not infringed. ‘House search, 82 kg dry ganja’It was placed on record that on August 2, 2023, the police conducted a search at the house of the accused, acting upon secret information and allegedly recovered about 82 kg of dry ganja stored in plastic drums. The contraband articles were seized in the presence of witnesses, and the accused was arrested. Based on the said incident, an FIR was lodged on the same day under the provisions of the After completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was submitted, and the special judge Sepahijala took cognisance and framed the charge against the accused.During the trial, the prosecution had cited several witnesses. However, none of the prosecution’s witnesses was examined. Also Read | Punjab and Haryana HC hears plea citing 74 lakh drug users, seeks responses from Punjab, Haryana, and ChandigarhThe special judge eventually closed the prosecution’s evidence and acquitted the accused on the grounds that no evidence had been adduced by the prosecution by an order of June 2024.Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the state preferred this appeal to set aside the said order and convict the accused of the charge under the NDPS Act, 1985.The state also prayed for the remand of the case to the court of a special judge(NDPS) and give a reasonable opportunity to the prosecution agency to produce their prosecution witnesses to prove their case. Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More © IE Online Media Services Pvt LtdTags:Tripura High Court