LAIJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the sole accused who stands convicted in S.C. No. 1089/2012 of the First Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kollam for offence punishable under Sec. 22(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985.

(2.) The prosecution claimed that on 12/5/2010, at about 11.a.m, a person introducing himself to be a public activist conveyed a secret information that one person wearing white shirt and black pant was standing at a specified location and selling narcotic drugs. It was recorded by the Circle Inspector of Excise and Enforcement & Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Kollam and it was transmitted to the superior officer -Assistant Excise Commissioner. Two staff of the Squad, who were deputed to confirm the information, proceeded to the place and confirmed about the truth of the information. Thereafter, the Excise Circle Inspector along with his party proceeded to the spot, reached there at 11.30. a.m. and identified the person corresponding to the physical features conveyed and intercepted him. After completing the formalities under Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act, search was conducted. From the pocket of his pants 26 ampules each containing 2 ml. of Bupernorphine and Rs. 1230/ - were recovered. After completion of the formalities, he was arrested at about 12.45 p.m. and a mahazar was prepared at 1.10. a.m. He was produced before the Magistrate along with the contraband articles. The investigation was completed by the Excise Circle Inspector who laid the complaint under Sec. 22(c) of the NDPS Act before the Sessions Court, Kollam. Pursuant to the summons, the accused appeared and pleaded not guilty. After recording the evidence, the charge was framed and the court below proceeded for trial. On the side of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 9 were examined and Exts.P1 to P22 series were marked. MOs 1 to 3 were identified. On the side of the accused DW1 was examined. The court below, on an evaluation of the available materials, concluded that the accused has committed an offence punishable under Sec. 22(c) of the NDPS Act, convicted and sentenced him to undergo RI for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. One Lakh and in default, to undergo RI for one more year.

(3.) Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence the accused has preferred this appeal. Heard both sides and perused the records.