LAWS(CHH)-2020-3-37

KUMARI SUDAMA @ RANI KEWAT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On March 05, 2020
Kumari Sudama @ Rani Kewat Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2-2-2009 passed by the Special Judge (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985) (for short, "the Act, 1985")/Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Special Case No. 20 of 2007, wherein the said Court has convicted the appellant for commission of offence under Section 20 (b)(ii) (b) of the Act, 1985 and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period from 14-7-2007 to 2-2-2009 (period already undergone by the appellant) and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulations.

(2.) As per prosecution case, Incharge of Police Station Masturi namely Sadhana Singh (PW/6) received information from one Mukhbir on 14-7-2007 that the appellant is selling contraband article Ganja illegally. This information was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha and witnesses were called and thereafter Panchnama was prepared. The information was sent to Deputy Superintendent of Police through Constable No. 192 Bharatlal Sahu and thereafter he rushed to the spot without search warrant with police personnel and independent witnesses and instrument of measurement. A notice was served to appellant for search and he opted to be searched by this Police Officer. All the staff members and independent witnesses were searched and no objectionable article was found and thereafter they searched the house of the appellant in which contraband article Ganja was found in her possession to the tune of 4 kgs and 200 grams. Two samples of 25 grams each were separated and sealed and seizure memo was prepared. Seized article was kept in Malkhana of Police Station for safe custody and samples were sent for chemical examination to FSL where test of Ganja was found positive. After completion of trial, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.

(3.) The appeal is preferred on the following grounds.