ASHOK Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONKARESHWAR Bhatt, J. This appeal has been directed against judgment and order dated 24-4-2000 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 95 of 1997 by the then Addl. Sessions Judge (E. C. Act) Bulandshahr. The appellant has been convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act and sentenced to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rupees one lac and in default of payment of fine one year further rigorous imprisonment has been awarded.

(2.) SRI Gyanendra Kumar Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellant and SRI R. S. Sengar, learned AGA appearing for the State have been heard.

(3.) IT has come in evidence that the contraband was sealed on the spot and it was deposited at the police station. According to Section 55 of the Act it is the officer in charge of the police station who is custodian of the seized article which has been delivered to him. The report of Chemical Examiner shows that the alleged seized article was received by him on 10-9- 1997. The report of Chemical Examiner further shows that 3. 250 Kilograms were received for analysis. IT is contended that the weight of the seized contraband is mentioned in the recovery memo as three kilograms. This weight of three kilograms appears to have been mentioned on estimation. IT has not come in evidence that after seizure it was actually weighed on scale by the Sub-Inspector. Since the weight is mentioned on estimation in the recovery memo and since the article was not actually weighed on the scale the mention of 3. 250 Kilograms in the report of the Chemical Examiner does not affect the veracity of the witnesses or cast doubt on the seizure of he contraband. The two witnesses of fact identified the seized article before the Court which was in yellow polythene and have also stated that it was recovered from possession of the appellant.