LAWS(GJH)-2012-5-145

CHHOTIBIBI DAUDBBAI CHHIPA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On May 08, 2012
CHHOTIBIBI DAUDBBAI CHHIPA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against judgment and order dated 16.07.2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Ahmedabad City, in Sessions Case No.103 of 2003 convicting the appellant for the offence under section 8(c) read with sections 20 (sic) and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('the N.D.P.S. Act', for sake of brevity) and sentencing her to rigorous imprisonment for twelve years with fine of Rupees one lakh, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further three months. The appellant Chhotibibi Chhipa was accused No.1 before the trial court. Accused No.2 was acquitted.

(2.) The prosecution case was that on 17.01.2003 at around 8.00 p.m. the Police Inspector of Shah Alam Police Station received secret information which he forwarded to his second Police Inspector that one Chhotibibi Chhipa, wife of Daudbhai Vakhatji, staying near Suryanagar underpass, was keeping in her house quantity of brown sugar and opium. As it was apprehended that she may elope with the contraband, the police swung into action. The higher officer was intimated in writing. Upon his instruction to conduct raid and after doing necessary panchnama and making an entry in the station diary, the officer with his staff along with panchas and a lady Constable swiftly reached Chandola, near Nawaz Masjid, at Suryanagar Chhapra. parked their jeep in front of a shop named S.S. Decorators. The raiding party entered a narrow street through a gate on the opposite of that shop. Leaving two gates, a woman was found sitting near the third gate, who, on being asked, identified herself in presence of panchas as Chhotibibi. The officer introduced himself to her that he was a police official from Maninagar Police Station, and wanted her house to be searched as he had definite information about contraband material illegally kept and possessed by her. She was explained and asked in writing whether she wanted to be searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or an Executive Magistrate, to which she replied in negative.

(3.) This court heard learned advocate Mr. R.M. Agarwal appearing for the appellant, and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. R.C. Kodekar on behalf of the State.