SHAFEEQ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal has been preferred by Shafiq Ahmad against his conviction under section 8/20 (b) (i) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and sentence of 10 years' R. I. coupled with fine of Rs. 100000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to under go one year's R.I. recorded by Sri Amar Sinha, Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow by his judgment and order dated 23rd March 1988 in Sessions Trial no. 432 of 1986.

(2.) TO embark upon the prosecution case, it is alleged that appellant Shafiq Ahmad was apprehended by P. Saran, Custom Inspector PW 1 on 26th of July 1986 at about 3.20 A.M. at Charbagh Roadways bus stand Lucknow in the presence of K. C. Agnihotri, Lalmani, Rajiv Agarwal, Brij Lak and Ram Asrey and recovered 9 kg. of Charas (hempt) from a container kept in a bag from the possession of the appellant. Thereafter along with the bag, appellant Shafiq was taken to the Custom Office which lay at a distance of six Kms. from Charbagh bus stand. The aforesaid Customs Inspector P. Saran while taking the accused from Charbagh bus-stand to his office took with him two persons namely, Ajai Kumar and Ram Lakhan from amongst the crowd gathered at the time of arrest and proceeded to the custom office Lucknow and there a recovery memo Ex. Ka 2 was prepared by P. Saran, Custom Inspector in the presence of public witnesses, Ajai Kumar and Ram Lakhan. Thereafter, signatures of the aforesaid witnesses, namely, Ajai Kumar and Ram Lakhan were obtained on the said recovery memo Ex. ka 2. Later on, a confessional statement Ex. ka 1 of the accused was extracted in the writing of the accused itself. Subsequently, the accused was sent to jail the same day.

(3.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined three witnesses namely, P. Saran, Custom INspector and Lalmani, Central Excise INspector on the point of arrest as well as recovery of contraband (charas) from the accused. K. K. Wasi was examined as a court witness in order to prove that the contraband recovered from the accused was found to be Charas on examination by him vide his report Ex. ka 5.