IQBAL MOOSA PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Criminal Appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 3rd November, 2006 passed in Sessions Case No. 183 of 2001 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions court, Ahmedabad, recording the conviction of the appellants-accused for the offences under Sec. 8 (c), read with Secs. 21 and 29, of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "n. D. P. S. Act")for possession and illegal smuggling and trafficking of heroin as a part of the conspiracy. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 2327 of 2006 is the original accused No. 1 and has been convicted and sentenced to twelve years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2007-Hemaram Chaudhary is the original accused No. 2 and he has been convicted and sentenced to twelve years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 343 of 2007 is the original accused No. 3. He has been convicted and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1235 of 2007 is original accused no. 4 and he has been convicted and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case, briefly summarized, are that a conspiracy was hatched for inter-state smuggling and trafficking/transportation of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances (heroin ). A secret information was received by Mr. K. C. Chudasma, Inspector, Anti-Terrorist Squad, which he passed on to Mr. Vipul Vijoy, Deputy Inspector General of Police, anti-Terrorist Squad, Gujarat State, which was ultimately passed on to Mr. P. S. Tomar, Zonal Director, Narcotics Control Bureau, Ahmedabad along with a copy of the information dated 29-6-2001. On the basis of such secret information, it was revealed that accused No. 2 - Hemaram Chaudhary was the kingpin and Derajram Jat - accused No. 3 was the man carrying out the operations at the instance of accused No. 2. It is on the basis of such further information that Truck bearing registration No. RJ-04-G-1305 carrying such contraband articles was returning without delivering the brown sugar at Bharuch, the raid was carried out on 29-6-2001 at around 2-40 p. m. at Lal Bahadur Shastri Bridge, pirana area in the City of Ahmedabad. The raiding party intercepted the aforesaid truck driven by accused No. 4 - Ashuram Durgaram Choudhary and accused no. 3 was accompanying him. Both the persons, who possessed the narcotic drugs, and the truck driver allegedly admitted the crime and also revealed the alleged supplier of the consignment, Mr. Hemaram Choudhary, accused No. 2, and accordingly, accused No. 2 was arrested. Therefore, both were detained and from further revelation, it was realised that the consignment could not be delivered to the drug-trafficker at Village Varadia, Tal. and Dist. Bharuch, gujarat and it was also revealed that he supplied 4 Kgs. of heroin to accused no. 1 at Bharuch in mid-March 2001.

(3.) IN order to substantiate these contentions, much emphasis has been given with regard to the appreciation of evidence in the form of depositions of Mr. Mohnish Bhalla - (P. W. 4), Intelligence Officer, N. C. B. , Ahmedabad at Exh. 81 and Mr. Pavansinh Tomar - P. W. 5, Zonal Director, N. C. B. at Exh. 119. There are contradictions in their evidence, and therefore, the same cannot be relied upon. Further, it has been contended that this evidence is required to be appreciated in light of the evidence or deposition of the defence witnesses. Another facet of the contention raised is that the mandatory provisions of Secs. 42 and 50 of the N. D. P. S. Act have not been complied with and the entire case, which has been created, is concocted and got-up and for non-compliance of mandatory provisions of the N. D. P. S. Act, the entire trial is vitiated.