STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Vs. HEM UPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred by the State under Sec. 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'CrPC') assailing the judgment and order dtd. 31/3/2004, passed by the learned Special Judge, Pithoragarh, in Session Trial No.05 of 2003, 'State Vs. Hem Upadhyay', whereby the said court has acquitted the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act').

(2.) In brief the facts of the case are that on 9/6/2003, at about 8 PM at place Bhadelbada Tiraha, Kumord, within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Kotwali and District Pithoragarh, the police recovered 500 gram of contraband article (charas) from the illegal possession of the accused, for which the accused did not have any licence. On the spot, the recovery memo exhibit ka 1 was prepared, on the basis of which the chik FIR exhibit ka 4, was prepared on the spot. The registration of the case was made in the general diary, a copy whereof of the exhibit ka (5). Before effecting the search, the consent letter from the accused (exhibit ka 2) was prepared. Memo of arrest (exhibit ka 5) was also prepared. During investigation, the Investigating Officer inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan (exhibit ka 6). The recovered contraband was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, for which the memo (exhibit ka 7) was prepared. The report given by the Forensic Science Laboratory exhibit ka 8) is on record, according to which, the recovered contraband article was found to be 'charas'. On completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the chargesheet against the respondent/accused in the court under Sec. 18/20 of the Act, which is (exhibit ka 9) on the record.

(3.) Vide order dtd. 29/8/2003, the learned Special Judge/Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, framed the charge under Sec. 20 of the Act against the accused, to which he denied and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to prove its case has produced as many as 4 witnesses, which are PW 1 Constable Satyapal Singh, PW 2 SO K.S. Rawat, PW 3 Constable Keshavlal and PW 4 SO P.C. Pandey. The accused did not lead any evidence in his defence and denied the allegations made against him in the statement recorded under Sec. 313 of CrPC. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Trial Court proceeded to acquit the accused as mentioned in paragraph 1 of this judgment.