compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act is not possible, then the Arresting Officer shall take resort to Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. In view of the provisions under Section 100 of the Cr.P.C., the Petitioner is required to be searched in presence of two independent witnesses. However, in the present case, the Petitioner was searched in presence of only one independent witness. In the aforesaid background learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that in the present case the adherence to provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. has been given a complete go by. As such, the entire proceeding against the present Petitioner is vitiated. In the context of compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 100 of the Cr.P.C., learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the detailed order in Prabhat Upadhyay vs. State of Odisha in BLAPL No.6601 of 2024 . On perusal of the order, it appears that this Court had taken note of the provisions contained in Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. and the procedure required to be followed by the Arresting Officer has been elaborately discussed. On a careful examination of the materials on record, this Court observes that in the present case there exists a deviation from the aforesaid established procedure.
