Supreme Court Acquits Russian National In Case Of Carrying Charas From Nepal To India

The Supreme Court has acquitted a Russian national in a case of bringing in 1.900 kg of charas from Nepal to India in 2016.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran set aside the judgment of the trial court and the High Court and ordered release of Doniyar Vildanov, if not wanted in any other case.

The appellant was convicted and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 20 and 23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and a fine of Rs one lakh with a default sentence of six months.

He was searched by a team of Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) on the Indo-Nepal Border leading to recovery and seizure of 1.900 kg of charas.

The accused on the other hand claimed that he was taken into custody on the previous day at the no man’s land and on his refusal to bribe the police, a false case was registered against him and his pet dog, accompanying him, was also taken away by the police team.   

The original passport of the appellant, which was part of the Trial Court’s record, indicated the appellant has left Nepal on November 05, 2016, while his arrest was recorded at 7.00 A.M. on November 06, 2016.  

It was argued that the contraband was planted and it was never recovered from the body of the accused nor from his possession.

State counsel, however, submitted, there is no possibility of any plant since the total value of the contraband would be almost Rs 23 lakhs.

The court noted, it was the SSB team led by a Sub Inspector who first confronted the accused and after having detected the contraband in his bag called PW1, also a Sub Inspector attached to the Sonauli Police Station. and his team, pursuant to which the search was conducted.

"The sequence of events as spoken of by PW1 to PW3 clearly indicate that immediately on interception the bag of the accused was searched and the contraband detected. The consent letter was signed after the detection was made and then the confession was alleged to have been made. The attempt is to say that the detection was separate from actual seizure,'' the bench said. 

However the contraband being inside the bag of the accused there was no possibility of detection without a search having been carried out. Obviously, the mandatory stipulation for search and seizure as per the NDPS Act was not carried out in its true letter and spirit, the bench added.

The court noted the site plan, as available from the records, indicated that the interception of the accused was after he entered into the territory of India. However, there was no such entry indicated in the passport. 

"Even if the accused was arrested before he reached the Immigration Counter, it was the bounden duty of the police who took him into custody to get his entry marked in the passport at the Immigration Counter,'' the bench said.

The fact of his exit from Nepal on November 05, 2016 and the absence of an endorsement of his entry into Indian territory raised yet another reasonable doubt, insofar as his interception at 7 A.M. on November 06, 2016, the bench said.

Yet again, the bench pointed out, PW1 has admitted that the accused had a pet dog accompanying him, the whereabouts of which is neither disclosed nor is the presence of the dog entered in the Mahazar. 

"This probablises the story of the accused in his Section 313 questioning that the police had an eye on his dog, which he refused to part with, thus leading to the false accusation,'' the bench said.

The court cannot but notice that even the recovery Mahazar does not indicate a bag in which the contraband is said to have been smuggled into India.  

"We cannot but notice that the inconsistencies in the evidence of PW1 to PW3 are not minor and are glaring enough to raise a reasonable doubt as to the complicity of the accused in the alleged smuggling of the contraband into India. We are unable to find the search and seizure to be in accordance with the mandatory prescriptions and hence the foundation of the case charged against the appellant falls apart,'' the bench said.  

The court held, the prosecution has failed to establish beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the offence alleged against him, of bringing in charas from Nepal to India.   

Allowing the appeal, the court ordered for return of the original passport of the accused available in the records to the counsel for the appellant, by the Registry with due acknowledgment taken.

Case Title: Doniyar Vildanov Vs The State of UP

Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran

Date of Judgment: January 30, 2026