#illegal search

The Himachal Pradesh High Court overturned a conviction after police failed to record written reasons for searching a vehicle under Section 165 CrPC and depended on a witness with a pattern of appearing in police cases. This ruling reinforces that procedural compliance is non-negotiable in search operations and that reliance on habitual police witnesses undermines evidentiary credibility in excise and criminal prosecutions.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a search conducted by the Railway Protection Force (RPF) without a warrant prior to FIR registration vitiates the recovery of property under the Railway Property Act. Additionally, confessions made to the RPF are inadmissible under Section 25 of the CrPC, reinforcing safeguards against illegal evidence in criminal proceedings.

Supreme Court holds that evidence seized during illegal search under PCPNDT Act remains admissible if relevant and genuine, upholding prosecution despite procedural flaws.