RAM SAGAR VERMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Ram Sagar Verma against the judgment and order dated 13.9.1990 passed by Shri Ratnakar Dikshit, the then Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Barabanki in S.T. No. 307 of 1989 whereby the appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (Herein after referred to as the Act), and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. one lakh and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a further period/term of one year.

(2.) SRI P. C. Rastogi, Amicus Curaie and learned A.G.A. were heard.

(3.) ALL the facts and circumstances and arguments of the learned counsel were considered. It so appears that in the instant case the contradictions created by P.W. 5, P.W. 6 and the two reports, one of the Opium Officer and the other of Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala, and non-production of the sample of seal have created serious doubts about the story of prosecution and about the recovery. In similar circumstances the Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Gopal, (1998) 8 SCC 449, found that in a case where seal of the sample sent to the Analyst was not produced in the Court for verification, then the case was found one of acquittal and the Apex Court held in the circumstances of that case that order of acquittal called for no interference by the Supreme Court. In the present case also the two reports are contradictory to each other. The sample of seal has not been proved to have been sent to the Chemical Examiner or the Opium Inspector. One sample was taken but two reports were obtained. The alleged sample of seal has not been produced before the Court for verification. This all creates serious doubt about the guilt of the accused. Under these circumstances, the trial court should have clearly acquitted the accused and should not have convicted and sentenced him. In the present case, the prosecution failed to prove the charge framed against the accused under Section 21 of the Act and he is not found guilty of the same and is entitled for acquittal. The appeal shall be allowed accordingly.