MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN FARAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was tried by the Court of Additional Sessions/Special Judge for Greater Bombay in N.D.P.S. Case No. 1232 of 1988, for committing the offences punishable under Sections 21, 23, 29 and 30 read with Section 8(c) of N.D.P.S. Act and Section 135 of the Customs Act. The learned Special Judge believed the prosecution evidence and held that the accused did possess 3.8 Kgs. of heroin in contravention of the provisions of N.D.P.S. Act and was thus guilty for the offence punishable under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) of the Act. The other charges of conspiracy and abetment were held not proved and, therefore, the learned Judge acquitted him of those offences. The charges under Section 30 of N.D.P.S. Act and Section 135 of the Customs Act were also held not proved. Feeling aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence imposed upon him, the appellant has filed this appeal.

(2.) The trial Court after appreciating the evidence of S. M. Sawant (P.W.1) who was then working as an Intelligence Officer in the office of Directorate of Revenue at Bombay and that of Krishna Kumar (P.W.2) who was then working as Assistant Director of D.R.I. at Bombay, held that their evidence was trustworthy and can safely be relied upon as it was also corroborated by the evidence of P.W.3 Anthony Fernandis, who was the Manager of the hotel in which the appellant had stayed. The trial Court further held that the evidence of these three witnesses clearly establishes that from room No. 201, which was occupied by the appellant, 2 packets containing 3.8 Kgs. of Heroin was found. The evidence of P.W.3 further discloses that the appellant was the only person staying in that room and that on search by the officers P.W.1 and P.W.2, 2 packets of Heroin, 2 passports, one in the name of Djama and other in the name of Abdul Rehman but bearing the photographs of the appellant and one packet with the false button were found from that room. The trial Court further held that their evidence further establishes that 2,700 US Dollars were also found from that room. The trial Court held that the evidence of P.W.4 Domnic, who was acted as a Panch witness, was also reliable and that evidence and the Panchnama, Ex.40 do corroborate the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2. The trial Court disbelieved the defence of the appellant that he was not staying in the hotel from which the said articles were found and that he was picked up by the officers while he was near his lawyer's office and then taken to the hotel.

(3.) The High Court on reappreciating the evidence of these witnesses agreed with the finding that their evidence is trustworthy and that their evidence is sufficient to establish that it was the appellant who was in possession of those articles.