JAIPAL SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 08.02.2013 and 14.02.2013 respectively wherein the appellant had been convicted under Section 20(b) (ii) (C) of the NDPS Act. He had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 2 years.

(2.) VERSION of the prosecution is that on 24.5.2011 when the members of the police party were on anti snatching picket at Shani Bazar Road, Narela, they noticed a loaded vehicle/tempo coming from the side of Shahpur Garhi. The driver of the vehicle was asked to stop. He was asked to produce the papers of the vehicle. He was unable to do so. From the backside cabin of the vehicle smell of ganja was emanating. The appellant (who was driving the vehicle) was asked to open the cabin which was found to contain 37 packets which on inquiry, the accused revealed it to contain ganja. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act (Ex.PW -2/A) was prepared and served upon the appellant. The appellant was informed of his right to get his search conducted before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. He refused the same. This was recorded at mark B. The aforenoted 37 packets which were wrapped in a pink colour panni wrapped with a yellow colour tape was opened. The ganja was weighed which was found to be 324 kg. Four samples of 1 kg each were drawn by taking out ganja from each katta (19 kattas). Each samples were put in a separate panni and packed separately in a white cloth. The balance contraband and the samples were sealed. FSL form was also filled. The contraband, samples and the FSL form were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW -2/B. The samples were deposited in the malkhana through Inspector Dinesh Kumar Sharma. They were then sent to the FSL and the FSL had tested them positive for ganja. Report under Section 57 of the NDPS Act was also prepared.

(3.) THE statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He pleaded innocence stating that the ganja had been falsely planted upon him and nothing was recovered from him. No evidence was led in defence.