HIRALAL Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.11.01 passed by Special Judge, under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') Bastar at Jagdalpur in Special Case No. 63/2000 whereby and whereunder the Special Judge after holding the appellant guilty for illegally possessing 2 kg contraband article cannabis (ganja), convicted him under Section 20(b)(i) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for three months. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without being any iota of evidence, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned, thereby committed illegality.

(2.) As per case of the prosecution, on 15.12.2000, Ratnesh Singh Tomer (PW-5), Sub-Inspector, received information from informant that 3-4 people are possessing ganja at Kanker bus stand. Ratnesh Singh Tomer (PW-5) recorded the information in rojnamchasanha and called two panch witnesses and informed them about the said information. Panchanama (Ex-P/1 and P/3) were prepared. He sent one police constable to inform the superior officers about the information. SDO, Police received copy of Ex-P/1 & P/3. They were apprehending that the persons having contraband article ganja may flee from the spot. He prepared panchname (Ex-P/2) and sent the panchnama for obtain search warrant towards SDO, Police. Thereafter IO (PW-5) along with police staff and panch witnesses reached bus stand, Kanker. Informer indicated the persons. Then he interrogated Manglu Ram, Heeralal and Balram Sahu and enquired about their name, address and from where they were coming. Investigating officer intimated the appellant about information regarding presence of ganja with him. The appellant refused for any such possession. Then he gave notice to the appellant under Section 50 of the Act and intimated him regarding his consent whether he wishes his search before any Gazetted Officer or before Magistrate or if he wishes he can be searched before the said officer. Notice (Ex-P/15) served upon him. The appellant agreed in writing that he wants to be searched by said police officer, then the witnesses, IO and staff were searched by the appellant and other accused. Nothing found upon the search of IO and other persons present. Thereafter panchanama (Ex-P/4) prepared. Then he made search of the body of the appellant and no contraband article was found. Talashi panchnama (Ex-P/5) is prepared. The appellant was keeping a packet with him, in which some ganja like contraband narcotic material was found which was physically examined and presence of cannabis (ganja) was confirmed. Panchnama (Ex-P/6) was prepared. They weighed the article recovered from the appellant, panchnama (Ex-P/7) was prepared. Thereafter weight of article found from the possession of the appellant was taken which was found 2 kg, out of which, two samples of 25-25 grams prepared. Namuna panchnama (Ex-P/9) was prepared. Remaining ganja was seized, sealed and seizure memo (Ex-P/10) prepared. The appellant was arrested vide Ex-P/16. Investigation regarding other persons found at the spot was separately done. The IO returned to the Police Station, deposited the ganja so seized with samples before Head Constable/Moharir and obtained receipt (Ex-P/12). He recorded his return. Detailed report prepared and sent to the higher police officials vide memo Ex-P/17 & P/18. He registered First Information Report vide Ex-P/19. Samples were sent to FSL, Raipur through SP Kanker vide memo Ex-P/20 and the same was received by FSL vide Ex-P/21. After chemical examination, FSL, Raipur gave its report vide Ex-P/22 and found presence of ganja in the samples. Family members of the appellant were informed regarding his arrest through wireless message to concerned police station. The IO sent First Information Report, seizure memo and information of arrest to the Kanker Court and statements of the witnesses were recorded.

(3.) After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before Special Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur. Learned Special Judge conducted the trial.