SHAMBHURAM Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.10.2002 passed by the Special Judge under N.D.P.S.Act, Bastar at Jagdalpur in Special Case No.22/2002, whereby learned Special Judge has convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 20 (a) (i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as "NDPS Act") and sentenced him to undergo RI for three years and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for nine months.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that on 24.7.2002 Mr.Ravindra Upadhyay (PW-5) while posted as Station House Officer at Police Station Bhanupratappur received a secret information from informant that the appellant had cultivated cannabis plants in his badi. He registered Rojnamacha Sanha vide Ex.P/16 and also prepared panchnama vide Ex.P/1 and sent information to the Sub Divisional Officer (P), Bhanupratappur and reached to the spot at village Pandarpuri and served a notice to the appellant under Section 50 of the NDPS Act for conducting search and informed him that he has a right to be searched in presence of the Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate, to which the appellant consented to be searched by Mr.Ravindra Upadhyay (PW-5). It is further case of the prosecution that in presence of witnesses, he searched badi of the appellant vide Ex.P/10 and seized 10 cannabis plants (7 + 3) from badi of the accused/appellant, which were identified by the witnesses and were measured vide Ex.P/4. The said cannabis plants were kept in two polythene bags and sealed vide Ex.P/5. Seizure memo was prepared vide Ex.P/6. Nazri naksha was prepared vide Ex.P/22. The accused/appellant was arrested vide Ex.P/23. On the basis of dehati nalishi, First Information Report No.128/02 was registered vide Ex.P/29. Seized articles were sent for Forensic Science Laboratory for test and report was received vide Ex.P/33 holding the plants to be cannabis plants. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the jurisdictional criminal Court for offence under Section 20 (a) (i) of the NDPS Act. The appellant abjured guilt and entered into defence and pleaded that he is not in possession of the house only, badi is not in his possession from where cannabis plants were seized and badi has a public road. He has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question.

(3.) In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 5 witnesses and exhibited 34 documents Exs.P-1 to P-34. Statement of the accused under section 313 of the CrPC, 1973 was recorded in which he denied guilt. However, he examined none in his defence.