ULRICHWEITZ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A foreign citizen, who is the sole accused in SC No. 17 of 2011, is the appellant herein, and in this appeal he challenges the conviction and sentence imposed on him, for the offence punishable under S.21(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), vide judgment dated 19/08/2011 of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge - I, Thiruvananthapuram.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 26/10/2010 at about 4.30 pm the Sub Inspector of police, Varkala police station, received a telephonic information that one foreigner wearing blue trousers was indulged in selling narcotic drug at Helipad ground, Varkala. On receiving the said information, according to the prosecution, PW 1, the then Sub Inspector of police, Varkala, reduced the same into writing and after forwarding the report to his immediate superior, proceeded to the spot along with PW 6 and he identified the accused on the basis of the description received and he approached the accused and ascertained his name and address and at that time the accused was found carrying a rose colour bag in his hand and when questioned, the accused answered that there was hashish inside the bag. On receiving such information, according to PW 1, he gave information to the police station to bring PW 4, the gold appraiser, and according to PW 1, after complying with the requirement under S.50 of the Act, he searched the body of the accused in the presence of the Circle Inspector of Excise, Attingal, but nothing recovered from the body of the accused. Thereafter, on further examination of the rose colour bag which was found in the possession of the accused, PW 1 could find a plastic cover, small packets of round shaped and stick shaped hashish. According to the prosecution, the accused was arrested on the spot at 5.45 pm. Thus according to the prosecution, after excluding the weight of the weighing machine, that found inside the bag of the accused, the bag as well as the contraband article were found to be 824.5 gms of weight. Thereafter according to PW 1, he had seized the contraband article and the material objects as per Ext. P1 mahazar and thereafter removed the accused as well as the contraband article and documents to the police station. It is also the case of the prosecution that, on 27/10/2010 a search was conducted at room no. 203 of the Thiruvathira beach resort, Varkala, where the accused was staying at the relevant time but no contraband article was recovered from there. Thus according to the prosecution, on 27/10/2010 the accused was produced before the committal Court.

(3.) I have heard Sri. Sasthamangalam S. Ajithkumar learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Smt. Lowzy A., learned Public Prosecutor for the State. I have also perused the judgment of the Trial Court.