KALU RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and the order dated 28.2.1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in S.C. No. 606/93 convicting the appellant under Section 21(ii) of the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short `the Act') and sentencing him to undergo the rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 21.3.1990, while ASI Hari Prakash (Public Witness -3) was on Petrol duty, he received a secret information that one person having Charas in his possession was standing near M.C.D. School Ghee Market Chowk. After reducing the said information into writing (Ex.PW.3/C), ASI Hari Prakash (Public Witness -3) along with Constable Salam Mohammed (Public Witness -6) apprehended the appellant near the said school. The appellant was given the option (Ex.PW.3/D) of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and on the appellants' declining the said option, ASI Hari Prakash (Public Witness -3) took search of the appellant and recovered the Charas wrapped in a piece of newspaper from the appellant vide seizure memo (Ex.PW.3/A). A sample of 5 gram of Charas from the Charas seized from the appellant was drawn. The sample as well as the remaining Charas were converted into separate parcels and they were duly sealed with the seals of the ASI Hari Prakash (Public Witness -3) as well as of the SHO J.L. Sahney (Public Witness -5), who accidently came to the spot. ASI Hari Prakash (Public Witness -3) prepared a Rukka (Ex.PW.2/A) on the spot and sent it to the Police Station on the basis of which the FIR (Ex.PW 2/B) registered at the Police Station Pahar Ganj. The case property was handed over to the SHO J.L. Sahney (Public Witness -5), who deposited the same in the police malkhana and thereafter sample was sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (for short `CFSL') and on receipt of the report (Ex. Public Witness 3/G) from the CFSL, showing that the sample was of Charas, the appellant was charge-sheeted for trial under Section 21 (ii) of the Act.

(3.) The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge framed under Section 21(ii) of the Act an 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 appellant and sentenced him as indicated above.