DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Vs. MOHD. ANWAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Leave Petition has been filed by the petitioner/Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (in short 'DRI') under Section 378(iv) of the Cr.PC. against the judgment of acquittal dated 18.03.2013 passed by the Special Judge for NDPS cases, Saket, New Delhi. Before referring to the grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner/DRI for seeking leave to file an appeal against the aforesaid judgment, it is deemed appropriate to briefly refer to the relevant facts of the case.

(2.) In brief, the facts of the case are that on 08.07.2009, the Intelligence Officer of DRI, Headquarters had received a secret information that at about 8.00 PM, the respondent would reach at a bus stop near the road leading to Delhi, opposite Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar for taking a public transport and he would be carrying some narcotic substance on his person or in a bag. After reducing the aforementioned information into writing, the Deputy Director, DRI was approached for permission to take steps to conduct search and seize the aforesaid narcotic substance. Two public witnesses, PW3 and PW4 had also been joined for recovery of the narcotic substance.

(3.) The raiding team led by the IO (PW2) had reached the spot and he confronted the respondent and asked him about the contents of the 'Nike' brand bag that he was carrying, to which he had replied that the same contained his personal belongings. The respondent was then told that his search for seizure of the narcotic substance was to be conducted and the petitioner claims that the DRI officers had given a notice to the respondent under Section 50 of the NDPS Act (Ex. PW2/A), in the presence of the panch witnesses while explaining to him his legal rights to get his person and the aforesaid bag searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. As per the DRI, the respondent had given a written reply to the aforesaid notice in his own handwriting and he had agreed that his search be conducted before a Gazetted Officer of the DRI in its office, and not at the place of his interception.