STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VAJIR RUPABHAI BHANABHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the appellant-State under section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 30.06.2003 passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Banaskantha, Deesa, in Special Case No.79 of 1997, whereby the respondent-original accused has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him under Sections 15 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short).

(2.) Short facts of the case are that when the complainant-P.K.Solanki, PSI and other staff members were going to conduct the prohibition raid, an information was received that the respondent-accused was dealing in illegal business of contraband article like poppy-pod at his residence. Thereafter, the complainant called two panchas and other staff members and a raid was arranged. The complainant along-with panchas and other members of raiding party went to the house of the respondent-accused, where the respondent-accused was present. Thereafter, a search was made in presence of panchas and one white polythene bag containing muddamal poppy-pod weighing 3.5 kg. was recovered which was kept without any pass or permit or licence. Thereafter, panchnama was drawn and muddamal article was seized which was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. After obtaining report from FSL, a complaint had been filed by the complainant against the respondent-original accused bearing C.R.No.I-6 of 1995 before Mavsari Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 15 and 21 of the Act. 2. 1. At the end of investigation and on the basis of material collected against the accused, a charge-sheet was filed against him. Thereafter, the charge was framed against the accused, which was read over to him. The accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. 2. 2. In order to prove the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined, in all 6 witnesses and also produced certain documentary evidence. 2. 3. Upon filing closing pursis by the prosecution, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., 1973 was recorded. The accused denied involvement in the crime. Since the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vav committed the case to the Court of Sessions at Banaskantha for trial, which was numbered as Special Case No.79 of 1997. After hearing the learned advocates appearing for the prosecution and the defence, the learned trial Judge acquitted the respondent-accused of the charges levelled against him, which is giving rise to the present appeal.

(3.) Heard Mr.K.L.Pandya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the appellant-State. Though notice of admission issued by this Court was duly served upon the respondent-accused, he did appear either personally or through any advocate.