LALJI SHUKLA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and the order dated 8.3.1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 113/94 convicting the appellant under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short `the Act) and sentencing him to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lakh or in default to suffer further rigourous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 1.2.1994, a police party led by Inspector Yashwant Singh, Public Witness 3 of Police Station Kirti Nagar, upon information received, apprehended the appellant on the spot. He was given the option (Ex.Public Witness 3/A) of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The appellant declined the offer. He was then searched by ASI Ram Saran (Public Witness 6) in the presence of Parveen Kumar, Public Witness 4, Constable Shammi Kapur, Public Witness 5, and Inspector Yashwant Singh (Public Witness 3) as a result where of 410 grams of charas was recovered from his possession vide seizure memo (Ex.Public Witness 3/C). The appellant was charged with an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Act and tried. The appellant abjured his guilt and alleged that a false case has been foisted on him. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on an assessment of evidence adduced by the prosecution, accepted the prosecution case and convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated above.

(3.) The point for determination in this appeal is whether on 1.2.1994, the contraband was recovered from the appellant's possession in accordance with the provisions of Section 50 of the Act. The evidence of the prosecution pertaining to the recovery of the contraband revolves around the testimony of Inspector Yashwant Singh Public Witness 3, Parveen Kumar Public Witness 4, Constable Shammi Kapur Public Witness 5 and ASI Ram Saran Public Witness 6. The aforesaid witnesses testified that on 1.2.1994, the appellant was apprehended on the spot and he was given the option (Ex.Public Witness 3/A) of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, but he declined the offer. Thereafter, A.S.I. Ram Saran (Public Witness 6) took search of the appellant and recovered the contraband charas from his possession vide Seizure Memo Ex.Public Witness 3/C. They further deposed that after seizure of the contraband a sample of 10 grams of charas was drawn from the charas seized from the appellant and the sample as well as the remaining charas were converted into separate parcels and they were duly sealed on the spot. CFSL form was filled up on the spot and the case property along with the CFSL form was deposited in the Malkhana. ASI Ram Saran Public Witness 6 deposed that on completion of the formalities regarding the alleged search of seizure, he sent the rukka (Ex.Public Witness 6/A) to the police station on the basis of which the FIR (Ex.Public Witness 6/B) was registered at the police station.