LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-335

SURKAHEY @ RAM SAMUJH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

Decided On August 17, 2017
Surkahey @ Ram Samujh Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 18.07.2016, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/Fast Track Court, Shravasti, in Special Session Trial No. 23 of 2010 (State v. Surkahey @ Ram Samujh), arising out of Crime No. 1727 of 2010 , under Sections 8/20, NDPS Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shravasti, whereby learned Additional Session Judge, hold guilty to the appellant Surkahey @ Ram Samujh, under Section 8/20 (ii)(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act"), and punished with 8 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the accused-appellant shall further undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The fact giving rise to this appeal may be summarized as under:

(3.) According to the prosecution on 16.09.2010 at about 6.00 A.M. near Babaganj Crossing, Police Station Kotwali, District Shravasti, accused-appellant was apprehended by the police party in the leadership of Sri Suraj Prasad, Sup-Inspector with 1 Kg. Cannabis (Charas). After apprehending the accused-appellant the search of the person of accused-appellant was conducted by the police party and on interrogation the appellant told his name Surkahey @ Ram Samujhand and further informed that he has 1 Kg. Cannabis with him in his bag. Thereafter the appellant-accused was informed regarding his right that he might be search in presence of Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, if he so desire. After receiving information from police party the appellant-accused gave his consent to be search by the present police party. A document of consent was prepared, which was signed by the leader of police party i.e. Sri Suraj Prasad, Sub-Inspector and accused made his thumb impression upon it. When further search was conducted 1 Kg. cannabis was recovered from the bag which was in the possession of appellant and the accused-appellant was taken into custody.