Man acquitted of illicit drugs find

Aman charged with one count of possession of illicit drugs and two counts of cultivation of illicit drugs has been acquitted by the High Court in Labasa. Assessors in the case against Navinesh Prasad earlier returned a not guilty opinion. Mr Prasad appeared before Justice Paul Madigan on Monday. It was alleged that on February 7, 2016, Police officers raided Mr Prasad’s home and found a small amount of dried marijuana leaves and seeds. However, during the trial Mr Prasad testified he was ambushed by about 20 officers who forced their way into his house without saying why they were there and without showing him a search warrant. He claimed the items found were not his and when he denied the knowledge of the items produced he said he was slapped and pushed against the wall. Justice Madigan said during the trial it was apparent the case had been poorly prepared. “Photographs were taken on the team leader’s mobile phone, but were never properly developed or produced in court,” Justice Madigan said. “Some witness expanded on their original evidence, adding undisclosed evidence to the prejudice of the accused.” Justice Madigan said statements were missing and the officers gave evidence which, in many aspects, contradicted each other. “Most importantly there was no evidence as to the chain of evidence relating to movements of exhibits,” he said. “It was assumed that the plants seized were delivered to the station and kept there to be shown to the suspect in his interview, but there was no evidence of that. “No evidence was given as to who carried the plants out from the farm or who took them to the station or who received them at the station and recorded them as exhibits. “There was no evidence given as to the production of plants before the chemist or her Superior or of the weighing of plants. “The chemist is not a Government chemist in terms of section 36 (1) of the Illicit Drug Control Act and as a result her certificate is not prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. “It would be dangerous to convict the accused on the evidence. “The court cannot be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the accused .... the drug samples tested were in fact those seized at the plantation or in the house,” he said. Justice Madigan agreed with the unanimous opinions of the assessors and found the accused not guilty.