LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-342

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. GANPATSING KHEMSING RAJPUT

Decided On March 11, 2015
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Ganpatsing Khemsing Rajput Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Banaskantha,at Deesa in Special Case (NDPS) No. 39/1999, whereby, the learned trial Judge acquitted the original accused the respondents herein, of the charges for the offence punishable under Section 17,18 and 29 of NDPS Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 6.1.1999, Police Sub Inspector Shri S.D. Patel and Police Constable Yusubkhan, Mehboobkhan and Manjibhai had come to the Gundari Check Post and started their duties to check the vehicles. At that time, one tanker being No. GJ -12 -U -7472 came from Mandar which was driven by Ganpansinh Khemchand Rajput and another person was Shivlal Maharamji Rabari. For making panchnama of the tanker, the PSI had called two panchas and also asked the accused whether they want their search to be carried out in the presence of Gazetted Officer or not, to which, the accused replied no. Therefore, in presence of panchas, a search was carried out of the person of accused and on the search of person of Ganpatsinh, nothing was found but one bag was found from the person of accused Shivlal Maharamji and on further search of the said bag, contraband article i.e. opium was found which was weighed and it was found 2kg 80 grams, which was seized in the presence of panchas, and necessary panchnama of seizure of contraband article 'ganja' was prepared, and thereafter, the complaint was lodged. Necessary investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, respondents were arrested and, ultimately, charge -sheet was filed against them, which was numbered as Special Case No. 39/1999. The trial was initiated against the respondents.

(3.) TO prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has examined witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.