BHAWAR SINGH Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 05.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in Criminal Appeal Nos. 329 and 413 of 2001, whereby the said Court has dismissed the appeals, affirming the conviction and sentence recorded against the Appellants Bhawar Singh and Goverdhan Under Section 8/19 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act') and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period often years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, and in default of payment, each defaulter is directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. The prosecution story, in short, is that the Appellant Bhawar Singh was a licence holder for cultivation of poppy and to produce opium. It is alleged that on 09.04.1996, when an inspection was made by Mr. Hakimuddin Mansoori (PW-4), Dy. Inspector of Central Bureau of Narcotics, it was found that the Appellant Goverdhan, Lambardar, had manipulated the entries in Daily Opium Weighment Register of cultivators in respect of the entries relating to Appellant Bhawar Singh. On receiving complaint from the said officer, Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, the District Opium Officer, directed Ramjiyavanram (PW-5), Inspector to register the crime and investigate the same. After investigation, it was found that against the production of 11.5 Kgs. of opium, the Appellant, Bhawar Singh, in connivance with Appellant Goverdhan, misappropriated 2.6 Kgs. of opium, and shown it in the record as 8.9 Kgs. The officer seized the relevant part of the register and prepared seizure memo (Exhibit P-1) in the presence of Panch witnesses. The investigating officer further recorded the confessional statements (Exhibits P-7 and P-8) of the Appellants. After investigation, the report was submitted to the competent court. Necessary copies were given to the accused and charges were framed. Thereafter, the prosecution witnesses, Shivnarayan (PW-1), Rameshwar (PW-2), Ashok Kumar Sharma (PW-3), Hakimuddin Mansoori (PW-4), Ramjiyavanram (PW-5) and A.K. Mishra (PW-6) were examined. Statements of the witnesses and documentary evidence were put to the accused Under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal procedure, in reply to which, the Appellants alleged that the evidence adduced against them were false and they have not canvassed the commission of crime. In defence, the Appellants got examined Radheyshyam(DW-1).

(2.) The trial court, after hearing the parties, found that the charge in respect of offence punishable Under Section 8/19 of the NDPS Act is proved against both the accused, namely, Bhawar Singh and Goverdhan and convicted them accordingly. After hearing on sentence, each of the convicts was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period often years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 07.03.2001 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, the convicts preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 329 and 413 of 2001 separately. Both the appeals were heard together by the High Court. The High Court concurred with the view taken by the trial court and dismissed the appeals.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellants argued before us that only overwriting in the weighment register of opium cannot be said to be the embezzlement committed by the Appellants in respect of opium poppy cultivated by the Appellant Bhawar Singh. We have considered the argument advanced on behalf of the Appellants and perused the seizure memo of the entries in the register (Exhibit P-5). We find that there are numerous 'over writings' made in the weighment register. The confessional statements made to the Narcotics Officer which are (Exhibits P-7 and P-8) by the Appellants clearly disclose that short quantity of the opium, i.e., 2.6 Kgs. was sold to one Rameshwar. This fact gets corroborated from the seizure memo prepared on 09.04.1996 by Ramjiyavanram (PW-5). Though later the panch witnesses have turned hostile before the trial court, however, the documentary evidence on record, as mentioned above, corroborates the statements of Hakimuddin Mansoori (PW-4) and Ramjiyavanram (PW-5). Both the courts below have discussed the evidence on record at length and found that the evidence adduced against the Appellants is reliable and trustworthy.