MOHAMMED RAWZDEEN ALIAS RAWZDEEN Vs. STATE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU SOUTH ZONAL UNIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three memorandum of criminal appeals are directed against the judgment dated 09.06.2008 and made in C.C.No.128 of 2005 finding the third accused who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.361 of 2008 guilty under Sections 8(c) r/w. 29, 8(c) r/w. 28 and 23(c), 8(c) r/w.27(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) convicting thereunder and sentencing to suffer ten years of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for each offences (3 counts) and in default, to suffer one year Rigorous Imprisonment; finding the second accused who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.240 of 2009 guilty under Sections 8(c) r/w. 29, 8(c) r/w. 21(c) and 8(c) r/w. 28 and 23(c) of the NDPS Act convicting thereunder and sentencing to suffer ten years of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for each offences (3 counts) and in default, to suffer one year Rigorous Imprisonment and finding the first accused who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.249 of 2009 guilty under Sections 8(c) r/w. 29, 8(c) r/w. 21(c) and 8(c) r/w. 28 and 23(c) of the NDPS Act convicting thereunder and sentencing to suffer ten years of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for each offences (3 counts) and in default, to suffer one year Rigorous Imprisonment. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the accused 1,2 and 3 have approached this Court by way of these memorandum of Criminal Appeals.

(2.) Since these three criminal appeals have emerged out of one and the same judgment dated 09.06.2008, and made in C.C.No.128 of 2005, on the file of the learned Special District and Sessions Judge (NDPS Act Cases), Madurai, it has become necessary for this Court to club these three appeals together and to pronounce the common judgment.

(3.) For easy reference, the appellant in Crl.A.No.361 of 2008 herein may hereinafter be referred to as the third accused, the appellant in Crl.A.No.240 of 2009 herein may hereinafter be referred to as the second accused and the appellant in Crl.A.No.249 of 2009 herein may hereinafter be referred to as the first accused.