LAXMAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this appeal has been found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 20/21 of the N.D.P.S. Act (for short `the Act') and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. one lacs or in default to undergo further rigourous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 6.9.1991, under trial Khushi Ram was brought from the Central Jail, Delhi for production before the trial Court. At about 1.30 P.M., the accused came to the judicial lockup at Patiala House and gave one bundle of bidi to the Constable on duty Anees Ahmad (Public Witness -1) for being handed over to the said Khushi Ram. On checking the said bundle of bidi by Constable Anees Ahmad (Public Witness -1), it was found to contain two PURIAS (small packets) of Charas and smack. Thereupon Constable Anees Ahmed (Public Witness -1) apprehended the accused on the spot and produced him before Inspector Dayanand (Public Witness -2), who intimated the SHO Tilak Marg about the alleged incident. S.I. Rajpal Singh (Public Witness -6), on receiving information at the Police Station Tilak Marg, came to the spot at about 1.45 P.M. and seized the bundle of bidi (Ex. P-1) along with the contraband vide seizure memo (Ex.PW-1/B). The seized property was duly sealed and the CFSL form was filled up. S.I. Rajpal Singh (Public Witness -6) recorded the rukka (Ex. PW-6/A) on the spot and sent it to the Police Station, on the basis of which FIR (Ex. PW-4/A) was registered at the Police Station. The case property along with the CFSL form was handed over to the SHO Balbir Singh (Public Witness -5), who deposited the same in the Police Malkhana and thereafter the seized contraband was sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (for short `CFSL') and on receipt of the report (Ex. PW-6/C), the accused was charge-sheeted for trial under Sections 20/21 of the Act.

(3.) The accused abjured his guilt and alleged that a false case has been foisted on him. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on an assessment of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, convicted the accused and sentenced him as indicated above.