JUDGMENT 1. This appeal deserves to be allowed on the ground that there was non-compliance with the requirement of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. 2. Before recovering a packet containing brown sugar weigh¬ing 4.380 grams from the person of the appellant, he was admit¬tedly not informed by the police officer that he had a right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a gazetted offi¬cer. Though this point was not taken up before the High Court, it being a pure point of law, we permitted the appellant to raise this point before us in view of the judgment of this Court in *State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh : (1999) 6 SCC 172 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 1080. It is the obligation of the police officer to inform the appellant of his right to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate, if the person of the accused is to be searched. Admittedly, in this case brown sugar was recov¬ered from the person of the accused and not from any other place. He was, therefore, entitled to be informed about his right. Since that was not done, as rightly conceded, this is clearly a case of non-compliance with the requirement of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. This appeal is, therefore, allowed, the impugned judg¬ment and the order of conviction and sentence are set aside and the appellant stands acquitted of the charge levelled against him. Appeal allowed.