BHAGRAJ TULSAJI VISNOI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Application is filed against an order passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banashkantha at Deesa on 18th of November, 2002 in Special Case No.89/2001 directing to arraign present petitioner Bhagraj Tulsaji as an accused along with other accused, i.e. opponent No.2 in this Revision Application, who is facing trial for offences punishable under Section 17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.

(2.) Necessary facts reveals that on 31st December, 2000, Mr.B.J.Patel, Police Sub Inspector, Dhanera Police Station, received information that opponent No.2 herein Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi resident of village-Gundan, Taluka-Sanchod, District-Zalor, Rajasthan State on a motorcycle registered in the State of Rajasthan trafficking narcotic drugs and on that day Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi, according to information received was to travel towards Deesa from Rajasthan. On receiving this information, along with other police constables, Mr.B.J.Patel, Police Sub Inspector came to Dhanera-Deesa Road and called for two panchas from the bus stand of village-Saamarvada. When this party was on watch, present opponent No.2 Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi was seen from Dhanera and, therefore, an attempt was made to stop him by raising a hand but on seeing the police staff, opponent No.2 parked his motor cycle at some distance from this police party and after alighting from the motorcycle ran way, who had worn a shirt and dhoti. Opponent No.2 at that spot could not be apprehended by the police in the presence of panchas. Motorcycle was seized and searched and was found that motor cycle was of Suzuki Max 100 made, registration number of which was RJ-16 1M-2368. On the right side of this motor cycle there was a small compartment used ordinarily as dicci or a trunk. On opening the said trunk in the presence of panchas a plastic bag was found containing two pieces of black substance. On verification, the said pieces of black substance was found opium, which was weighed and found to be of 1100 grams. Thereafter, complaint in this respect came to be filed in the Police Station at Dhanera against Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi, opponent No.2 at 20:15 hours. The incident took place at 19:15 hours. A complaint against opponent No.2 came to be filed under Section 17 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. After investigation a chargesheet came to be filed against present opponent No.2, Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi. It is pertinent to note that after the arrest of the accused during investigation on 20th May, 2001 vide Panchnama Exh.24, the accused Kisnram Ruparam Visnoi handed over the registration book of the motor cycle involved in the incident and his driving license, to the investigating agency. The driving license belonged to opponent No.2 Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi, while as per the registration book of the motor cycle seized, the owner of the motor cycle was one Tagaram Bhaktaram. During investigation Investigating Officer has also collected evidence to the extent that the said motor cycle used for the commission of the crime by opponent No.2 though belonged to Tagaram Bhaktaram as per the Registration Book, but the same was sold by Tagaram Bhaktaram to the present petitioner Bhagraj Tulsaji for Rs.32,000/- before two and a half months from the date of his deposition in the trial. It was also a prosecution case during investigation that Bhagraj Tulsaji, the present petitioner had sold this motor cycle to opponent No.2-accused, Kisnaram Ruparam Visnoi. The investigating officer recorded the statements of Bhagraj Tulsaji, as well as of Tagaram Bhaktaram both.

(3.) On submitting the chargesheet before the Special and Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Deesa, a charge was framed originally vide Exh.6 against opponent No.2, Kisnamram Ruparam Visnoi for the offences punishable under Section 17 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. The prosecution examined uptill now, 15 witnesses and the evidence of 15th witness, Mafatbhai Chelabhai, was incomplete because he did not bring the required Muddamal register. In these 15 witnesses, except complainant and investigating officer Mr.B.J.Patel all the witnesses were examined by learned Trial Judge.