VARSANGBHAI GANPATBHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant preferred this appeal challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and order rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) ('learned trial Judge', for short) on dated 26.5.2003 in NDPS Case No.2 of 2002. By virtue of the impugned judgment and order the learned Additional Sessions Judge was pleased to convict the appellant - accused for the offence punishable under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropics Substances Act ('NDPS Act', for short), the accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment ('RI', for short) for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/ -, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year for the aforesaid offence.

(2.) THE prosecution case in nutshell is as under: -

(3.) THE learned trial Judge framed charge against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) of the NDPS Act at Exh.4. Since the accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried, the prosecution adduced its oral and documentary evidence. After the completion of the evidence, the learned trial Judge recorded further statement of the accused. The accused generally denied all the allegations leveled against him and stated that he was residing in the house situated at Biroli Road, along with his wife and children. That the house in which the charas was found was not his house and he was not residing in said house and he was falsely implicated in this case.