RAMJIBHAI JIVRAJBHAI DAVE Vs. STATE OF GUAJRAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED advocate Mr. Mihir H. Pathak for the appellant requests that he may be permitted to amend the Memorandum of Appeal because errors in factual narration in the pleadings were noticed. He tenders draft amendment, which is granted. The amendment may be carried out forthwith and the factual correction may be effected in the pleadings.

(2.) THE present Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 15.11.2006 passed by learned Presiding Officer, 2nd Fast Track Court, Rajkot in Special (NDPS) Case No. 8 of 2005. Thereby, the appellant hereinaccused No.1 came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 15, 18 and 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. In respect of the conviction for each of the abovementioned offences, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1 lakh and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 1 year. In other words, the substantive sentence in respect of each of the convictions was 10 years rigorous imprisonment, whereas fine of Rs.1 lakh with same default clause, was imposed for the said three different convictions. The order provided that the period spent in jail by the appellant as an undertrial prisoner would be counted for set off. It was provided that all the sentences would run concurrently.

(3.) THE prosecution case was that upon receipt of secret information, the raiding party reached the place of a house situated near Rangeela Hanuman, Kothariya Road, Vivekanandnagar, Rajkot. The said house, according to the prosecution, was of the appellant and he had been residing there. The prosecution stated that from the said place, the appellant was caught with poppy -straw and the quantity was 5 kgs. 925 grms. of the value of Rs.2950/ -. Along with the appellant, another person -accused No.2 was also nabbed. The said accused No.2 was found to have kept 100 grms. poppy -straw in his rickshaw. It was the case of the prosecution that the appellant was selling the said contraband substance keeping it in the said house and that accused No.2 had purchased 100 grms. quantity from the appellant. The contraband material so recovered was prima facie examined and upon it being found to be poppy -straw, the same was sent for examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory in different samples after applying the requisite procedure of sampling.