VIJENDRA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.03.2002 passed by Special Judge (NDPS) Bastar at Jagdalpur in Special Case No. 53/2001 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 20 (b) (i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short the "NDPS Act") and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 3000/-, plus default stipulation.

(2.) Facts of the case in brief are that on 23.09.2001 at 1:05 AM a secrete information was received by Sub Inspector Narayan Oti (PW-2) to the effect that passing by some old bridge one man was carrying Ganja towards Jagdalpur for sale. Thereafter, PW-2 reduced the said information to writing vide Ex. P-2 and forwarded the same to CSP Jagdalpur vide Ex. P-4. Subsequently, PW-2 along with staff people, reached the spot, gave notice Ex. P-7 as per the requirement of Section 50 of the NDPS Act to the accused who was already present there, apprised him of his statutory rights of being searched by the Gazetted officer or the Magistrate or by him i.e. PW-2. On consent being given by the accused, PW-2 and his staff gave their own search under Ex. P-8, found 4.5 Kg of contraband (Ganja) in possession of the accused under Ex. P-9 which was kept in a white colour bag and then seized the same under Ex. P-16. After carrying out the weighment proceedings of the contraband two samples of 25 grams each were drawn and sealed vide Ex. P13, contraband and the samples were sealed. Contraband and the samples were kept in safe custody in the Maalkhana of police station Jagdalpur after entering the same into the register prescribed for that. One sample marked as article "A" was sent for chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur on 28.09.2001 vide memo Ex. P-23. On chemical examination being done, the sample so sent was confirmed to be that of Ganja vide Ex. P-23 - the report of the FSL. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed by the police for the said offence followed by framing of charge accordingly.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, prosecution has examined 04 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charge levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. This apart, one witness namely Anti alias Acti (DW-1) has also been examined by the defence in support of its case.