VEERAIYAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the judgment dated 19.5.2003 of the learned Special District and Sessions Judge for EC and NDPS Act cases Mudrai in C.C. No.471 of 2000, convicting him under Section 8(c) read with 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three years, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, as unfolded by the witnesses is as follows: PW2 Mohamed Khan was working as Grade I Police Constable in NIB, Tuticorin. He was informed by his informent that a person is going to smuggle heroin and he informed the same to PW6. Sub-Inspector of police. He registered it in Ex. P12. Then, he sent intimation to the Inspector of Police and left along with police party with necessary kit. At the scene of occurrence, they requested two persons to be witnesses for the occurrence. On an identification by the informant, they stopped the accused, and expressed their suspicion that he was in illegal possession of contraband, informed about the mandatory provision and given the opportunity of being searched before any Gazetted Officer or before Judicial Magistrate, for which he has stated that they themselves can examine him. The consent letter is Ex.P3. On search, he was found in possession of 500 grams of heroin in 8 white polythene bag concealed in his hip. PW2 had taken two 10 grams for sample, packed and sealed it in a cover and packed the remaining contraband of 480 grams in another cover. PW7 arrested the accused at about 22.05 hrs. He prepared the arrest report Ex. P13. Ex. P14 is the intimation of arrest. They returned to the station and registered a case in Crime No. 1 of 2000 for the offence under Section 8(c) read with 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to the same as 'the Act'). He prepared the First Information Report under Ex. P15. He kept the property in the locker. He prepared the intimation on as per Section 57 of the Act and sent it to the Deputy Superintendent of Police. Only. 1.2000, he visited the scene of occurrence and prepared observation Mahazar and rough sketch in the presence of witness under Exs.P17 and P18. He sent the accused with the property for judicial remand. On 21.1.2000, he filed the report before the Court. PW3-Head clerk of the Court received Exs.P5 and P6 and sent the seized contraband for chemical analysts under Ex. P7. Ex. P8 is the Chemical Analyst's Report. After examination of the witnesses and after completion of the investigation, on 5.4.2000 PW7 laid the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 8 (c) read with 21 of the Act.

(3.) The Trial Court framed charges under Sections 8(c) read with 21 of the Act against the accused. When the accused was questioned in respect of the incriminating circumstances available against him, he denied the same. Since he pleaded not guilty, he was put on trial. Before the Trial Court, on the side of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 7 were examined, Exs.P1 to 19 were exhibited and MOs1 to 3 were marked. On the side of the accused, no one was examined, however, Exs. D1 to D3 were marked.