STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BABUSING BACHANSING PUROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter was heard on 1st February 2012. It was adjourned to 2nd February 2012 to enable the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to find out the present position of Shri B.G. Nagori, Police Inspector, who, at the relevant time, was a member of the Squad. THE learned APP, Mr.Pujari asked for time and the matter was adjourned to 6th February 2012. THE learned APP produced a xerox copy of death certificate of said Shri B.G. Nagori.

(2.) THE present appeal is filed by the State of Gujarat being aggrieved by judgement and order dated 30th April 1990 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, 16th Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.123 of 1989, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit the accused for the offence under section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act") and for the offence under section 66(1)(B) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. Learned APP Mr.Pujari submitted that the learned Judge has committed error in recording acquittal of the accused despite the fact that there was cogent and convincing evidence establishing the guilt of the accused.

(3.) WE have considered the contents of the said para and the discussion about the credibility of the evidence of the prosecution. WE are in agreement with the view expressed by the learned Additional CityB Sessions Judge, 16th Court, Ahmedabad on the point. It is settled principle of law that if the evidence of the prosecution loses its credibility in light of the contents of Exhibits 42, 43 and 45, the learned Judge was justified in not relying upon the same and recording acquittal.