LAWS(KAR)-2009-7-19

STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. GANAPATI BHIMAPPA MARCHAPPANAVAR

Decided On July 08, 2009
STATE OF KARNATAKA Appellant
V/S
Ganapati Bhimappa Marchappanavar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal in Special Case No. 10/200 1, which was registered for trying the accused -respondents for offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985, (for short 'the NDPS Act").

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution before the Trial Court, on 23.12.1998, the police of Badami Police Station received reliable telephone message from Kulageri police out -post that there was illegal transportation of ganja from Govanakoppa village to Ramadurga via Kulageri Village. Then, P.W.2, the Police Sub -Inspector of Badami Police Station, said to have flashed the message as required under Section 42 of the Act to his higher -ups and then made arrangements to keep a watch for the jeep in which the ganja was being transported. Accordingly, when the C.P.I, head constable and other police constables were keeping a watch near Kulageri cross in a jeep, they noticed a tempo trax jeep bearing registration No. KA -25/M -3643 coming from Govanakoppa side. When the police signaled the said vehicle to stop, it did not stop, therefore, they had to chase the said jeep. When the said jeep took a turn towards Ramadurga side, ultimately, police chased the said trax jeep and could stop the same near Chimmanakatti bus -stand. They found two persons, who were alleged to be the accused persons before the Trial Court, present in the said jeep and on enquiry, the older man in the said vehicle showed the gunny bags in the vehicle said to contain ganja. According to the information, they were transporting the same from Konnur to Ramadurga. On enquiry, they found that these persons did not have any licence to transport the same and they disclosed their names as Mahammadsab Fakrusab Attar and the name of the driver as Ganapati Bhimappa Marachappanavar. It is further stated that the C.P.I. gave option to the accused whether they had to be personally searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer and the accused said to have accepted the search by the CPI himself, therefore, in the presence of the panchayatdars, personal search of the accused was made and no incriminating material was found. So far as the five gunny bags in the trax jeep is concerned, when they were weighed, it was about 85.5 kgs. and the worth of ganja was valued at Rs.35,000/ - as on that day. The police collected sample of the said ganja from the 5th bag. This is the gist of the complaint as well, which is marked as Ex.P.2.

(3.) AFTER filing of the charge -sheet, the matter was tried by the Special Court. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges framed for offence under Section 20(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act. Prosecution examined five witnesses, as stated above, marked three documents and three material objects. No defence evidence was let in after recording Section 313 statement. Therefore, arguments of the Public Prosecutor and the defence Counsel were heard. The learned Judge of the Special Court, on perusal of the entire material on record, ultimately, held that there was grave procedural lapses during the course of investigation and the very role played by each of the police officials, as stated by them before the Court on oath, seems to be doubtful. Therefore, he opined that no reliance could be placed on the evidence of the witnesses in order to convict the accused for the charges levelled against them. Ultimately, the accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order of acquittal, the State has come up in this appeal.