VARGAS JOSEANTONIO MAURICIO Vs. D. R.I.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order dated 07.07.2012 and 13.07.2012 passed in Sessions case no. 21A/08 passed by Learned Special Judge, NDPS, Saket Court by which the appellant was convicted under Section 21(c) & 23(c) r/w Section 28 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as NDPS Act) and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years each and a fine of Rs 1 Lakh each for both the aforesaid offences, and in default of fine to further undergo S.I. for six months each for the said offences.

(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that on 25.10.2007, an intelligence was gathered by Sh Raman Mishra, Intelligence officer of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence(DRI) that one man named Vargas Joseantonio Mauricio would leave from Delhi to London by Cathay Pacific flight on 28.10.2007 and he would be carrying narcotic drugs concealed either in his checked in baggage or on his person. On taking instructions from N.D. Azad, Senior Intelligence Officer and based on the said information, a team of DRI officers accompanied by two public witnesses on 28.10.2007, had reached the IGI Airport and had off loaded the accused from the Cathay Pacific Flight no. CX-752 which was scheduled to depart at 7:40 AM. The accused was found to be holder of one Canadian Passport no. WK280916 which was seized vide Ex.PW3/E and was scheduled to travel from Delhi to London, via Hongkong, Vancouver by the said flight. The accused was carrying a blue colour trolley bag marked "Jetliner? and a black colour zipper bag as his hand bag. The accused was told about the above secret information and he was then taken to the conveyor belt to identify his checked-in baggage. He had thereupon identified two suitcases covered with dark green colour cover, which were then retrieved. Thereafter, accused along with the baggage was taken to the left wing of the Customs Preventive Room situated at the departure hall of the Terminal-II of the airport.

(3.) The accused was asked there, in the presence of the public witnesses, as to whether he was carrying any contraband goods and he had replied in negative. Thereafter, he was served with a notice U/S 50 of the NDPS Act Ex. PW6/A asking specifically as to whether he required the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer for carrying out his personal search and the search of his checked in baggage and in reply to the same he had expressed his willingness by writing on the said notice that any officer of DRI could search him and his baggage. On being asked, the accused had also provided the keys of the above two checked in suitcases to the DRI Officers.