SHIVKUMAR SHRIRAMCHANDRA KATIYAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the appellant accused under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 04.03.2009, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.16, Ahmedabad (herein after referred to as 'the trial court') in Sessions Case No.366 of 2004 (NDPS), whereby the trial court has convicted the appellant accused for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 8(c) and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (herein after referred to as 'the said Act'), and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of 10 years, and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/, in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for the period of 1 year for the said offences.

(2.) As Per The Case Of The Prosecution, The Police Inspector, Crime Branch, Ahmedabad Mr. R.D. Baranda on 19.10.2004, had received a secret information to the effect that one person named Mr. Shiv Kumar of U.P., residing at Shakrabhai Mafabhai Desai ni Chali, Hirawadi road, wearing gray coloured pantsshirt, aged about 2025 years, was going to pass through the road from Hirawadi towards Bapunagar Memco, on bicycle, carrying charas in one bag at about 9 9.30 pm. On receipt of such secret information, Mr. Baranda had organized a raid, and he along with his team, had kept watch at the place of secret information. When they saw the person with the description as given in the secret information coming on the bicycle, he was apprehended and searched after following the due procedure. On search having been made, the contraband article charas weighing about 7 kg 77 grams was found from the bag he was carrying on bicycle. The said article was seized after taking out samples therefrom for analysis. The said Mr. Baranda after drawing the panchnama in the presence of panch witnesses, had arrested the accused and lodged the complaint. Thereafter, the samples of the seized articles having been sent to FSL for examination, the same were found to be charas.

(3.) The Investigating Officer After Completing The Investigation, Had laid the chargesheet before the trial court, who after framing the charge against the accused for the alleged offences, and after appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution, had convicted and sentenced the appellant accused, as stated herein above.