ANVARKHAN JAMILKHAN PATHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals arise out of the judgment and order rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Nadiad dated 6th June 2006 in Special Case (NDPS) No. 5 of 2003. Both the appellants in both these appeals, who are original accused in the aforesaid Special Case came to be convicted for the offence punishable under section 21 read with section 8 (C) and sec. 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "ndps Act") and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and was imposed fine of Rs. 1 lac each; and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The prosecution case which unfolded during the course of trial is that the Intelligence Officer of Narcotic Control Bureau, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "ncb, Ahmedabad"), Mr. Deepak Pareek, who is examined at PW-2, Exh. 40, received secret information when he was in his office in the morning of 30th January 2003, to the effect that two persons would be delivering contraband and illicit substance between 04. 30 PM and 05. 00 PM at the ST Bus Stand, Kheda. Mr. Deepak Pareek received the secret information with physical description of both the persons including their clothes which they are likely to wear. Information also disclosed that both these persons have received the contraband substance from one Adilkhan and at the ST Bus Stand they would be delivering it to some third person. On receiving such secret information PW-2, Mr. Deepak Pareek reduced it in writing and forwarded the same after translating it into a typewritten transcript, to his immediate superior. Panchas were called and were apprised of the information received by Mr. Deepak Pareek. Preliminary Panchnama was drawn in the Office of the NCB, Ahmedabad. Thereafter, PW-2, Intelligence Officer, Mr. Deepak Pareek; PW-3, Intelligence Officer, Mr. Vikram Ratnu, both these Panchas including Panch, PW-1, Manubhai Kalidas Jadav and other NCB officers proceeded to Kheda. Initially, they went to Kheda Bus Stand. The raiding party was divided into two groups. When they reached Kheda Bus Stand at about 04. 30 PM they found two persons standing near public urinals of the Bus Stand. The description which was received by way of information matched with those two persons who were spotted at the public urinals. Initially, the raiding party waited to see the actual delivery to be effected by them to third person. However, at that time they found that a bag was in the hand of one person. It is also the case of the prosecution that thereafter, the person who was holding the bag gave it to another person and he proceeded towards the exit gate of the Bus Stand. Immediately, one group of the raiding party came near the person, who was standing near public urinals and was holding the bag. The second group chased the person, who was proceeding towards the exit gate of the Bus Stand. The first group which reached near the person, who was holding the bag disclosed their identity and inquired about the name, etc. of the person and he was original accused no. 1-Anwarkhan. The second group, who chased the person, who escaped from the spot could not apprehend the said person. The bag found from the person of accused no. 1-Anwarkhan was opened and from the said bag two polythene bags containing contraband material came to be found. Since the place from where the contraband was found was a public place and some persons gathered there, the NCB officers thought it fit to go to the PWD Guest House, which was just adjacent to Kheda Bus Stand for sampling and sealing the muddamal contraband articles and as per the prosecution case, accused no. 1-Anwarkhan consented for the same. In PWD Guest House, Kheda, contraband substance found was weighed and the total weight of the contraband substance from both the polythene bags was found to be 2 KG and 30 grams. From each bag, three samples were collected and put into packets and on the outer cover of each sample, required seals were affixed and both the Panchas including the Intelligence Officer of the NCB signed it. The second part of the Panchnama was completed there in PWD Guest House, Kheda. Summons under section 67 of the Act was issued to accused no. 1-Anwarkhan, which he received. PW-2, Mr. Deepak Pareek, an empowered officer recorded the statement of accused no. 1-Anwarkhan. Search was made about another man, who escaped from Kheda S. T. Bus Stand. Information was received that second man was found by the Madhya Pradesh Police and therefore, PW-2, Mr. Pathak went to Shah Jahan Pur Police Station. There he found second man, who escaped and he turned out to be accused no. 2-Firdoskhan. As per the case of the prosecution, accused no. 2-Firdoskhan agreed to come to the Office of the NCB, Ahmedabad and therefore, PW-2, Pathak and accused no. 2-Firdoskhan came to the Office of the NCB, Ahmedabad on 9th February 2003. Summons under section 67 of the Act were issued to him which accused no. 2-Firdoskhan accepted and PW-2, Mr. Pathak recorded the statement of accused no. 2-Firdoskhan under section 67 of the Act during the night intervening between 9th and 10th February 2003. One set of muddamal sample was forwarded to the FSL and second set of sample was forwarded to CRCL, New Delhi. It was reported that the Muddamal found was a contraband article. PW-3, Intelligence Officer-Mr. Vikram Ratnu filed a criminal complaint in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Nadiad, which was numbered as Special Case (NDPS) No. 5 of 2003.

(2.) THE learned Trial Judge framed charge against both the accused at Exh. 16, to which they did not plead guilty and came to be tried. Thereupon, the prosecution examined four witnesses, namely, pw name exhibit 1 manubhai Kalidas Jadav 29 2 deepakbhai Triloknath Pareek 40 3 vikram Ratnu 73 4 janmohammed Fakirmohammed Mansuri 93

(3.) NO more witnesses were examined by the prosecution to support the prosecution case. The prosecution produced relevant documentary evidence. After prosecution concluded its oral evidence, the learned Trial Judge recorded further statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Both the accused in their further statement denied generally all the incriminating circumstances and submitted that they were falsely implicated in this case. After considering the evidence on record and the submissions made on behalf of both the sides, the learned Trial Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against both the accused and recorded conviction under section 21 read with section 29 of the Act and awarded sentence as hereinabove referred in this judgment.