PALASWAMI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 22.03.2011 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dharwad in Special N.D.P.S C.C.No.1/2010 convicting the appellant for an offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (The Act' for short) and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo R.I. for two years.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 11.01.2010 at about 19.30 hours, the accused was found in possession of 21 kgs of Ganja in two air bags in the old bus stand, Hubli, without any permission and hence is charged for having committed the offence under Section 20 (b)(ii)(c) of the Act. The prosecution in order to prove the case has examined in all 10 witnesses and got marked Exs.P1 to P14 and produced M.Os. 1 to 4. The defence of the accused was one of total denial. The learned Special Judge after hearing the prosecution and the defence, found the accused guilty and convicted him as aforesaid. The convicted accused has filed this appeal.

(3.) THE learned High Court Government Pleader on the other hand submits that PW10 is the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Hubli, who is the Gazetted Officer. He submits that Ex.P2, which is the spot mahazer clearly indicates that A.C.P was present at the time of seizure of Narcotic Drug and therefore, it is sufficient compliance of Section 50 of the Act. Ex.P8 is the document showing the option given to the accused to be searched by the Gazetted Officer and therefore, the mandatory provision under Section 50 of the said Act is complied with. He further submits that, on the basis of the evidence of PWs 1 to 10, the prosecution has successfully proved that the accused was in possession of a Narcotic Drug. Ex.P5 is the certificate issued by the Forensic Science Laboratory, which clearly indicates that the material possessed by the appellant is a Narcotic Drug. Hence he submits that the conviction recorded by the learned Special Judge is based on the evidence on record and does not call for interference and hence he submits that the appeal may be dismissed.