NAGARAJAN BHASKARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein are the two accused in S.C.No.566/2010 of the Court of Session, Kollam. They faced trial before the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, 'the NDPS Act ') on the allegation that at about 3.30 a.m. on 28.11.2005, near the KSRTC bus stand at Karunagappally, they were found jointly possessing huge quantity of ganja, contained in two carry bags and two suitcases. One carry bag and one suitcase were seen carried by the 1st accused, and the other were seen carried by the 2nd accused. They were found in company at the place of incident by the Excise Inspector of the Karunagappally Excise Range in suspicious circumstances. He detected the offence during usual night patrol duty. He expressed his intention to search their body, and told them about their right to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate. The two accused waived their right, and consented to be searched by the Excise Inspector himself. Though the accused waived their right, the Excise Inspector felt it proper to conduct search of the body of the two accused in the presence of a gazetted officer. Accordingly, he procured the presence of the Circle Inspector of Police of the locality, who reached there at about 3.30 a.m. In the presence of the Circle Inspector of Police, the Excise Inspector conducted search of the body of the two accused, but no contraband article could be seized. When the Excise Inspector inspected the carry bags and the suitcases found in the possession of the two accused, he found huge quantity of ganja. The air bag carried by the 1 st accused was found containing 5.820 kgms of ganja, the suitcase in his hands was found containing 22.100 kgms of ganja, the air bag found in the possession of the

(2.) nd accused containing 5.340 kgms of ganja, and the suitcase in the possession of the 2nd accused was found containing 13.500 kgms of ganja. The accused were arrested on the spot, and the contraband articles were seized as per a mahazar. The required quantity of samples were also taken from the four containers. After complying with the procedural formalities, the accused and the properties were taken to the Excise Range Office, where, the crime and occurrence report was registered. The Excise Circle Inspector conducted investigation, and he submitted final report in court. 2. The two accused appeared before the learned trial Judge, and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them under Section 20(b)(ii) C of the NDPS Act. The prosecution examined six witnesses, and proved Exts.P1 to P16 documents in the trial court. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the two accused denied the incriminating circumstances, and projected a defence that this is a false case foisted against them due to enemity. They also contended that they were not in fact arrested at or near the KSRTC bus stand. They also maintained a defence that no quantity of ganja was seized from their possession by the Excise Inspector. In defence, the accused examined two witnesses, including the wife of the 1 st accused. MO1 to MO8 properties were also identified during trial. On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found both the accused guilty. On conviction, they were sentenced to undergo the minimum prescribed jail sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each, and to pay the minimum prescribed fine of Rs.1 lakh each. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 17.12.2015, the two accused have come up in appeal.

(3.) On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials, I find no reason for interference in the findings or the conviction made by the court below against the two accused. Of the six witnesses examined in the trial court, the material witnesses are PW1 to PW3. PW4 and PW5 are the Circle Inspectors of Excise, who conducted investigation. There is nothing to show that there was any flaw, or irregularity, or illegality in the investigation conducted by the Excise Circle Inspectors. The evidence on facts is mainly that of PW1 to PW3.