LAXMINARAYAN RAMSWAMY KUNDARAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against conviction of the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge, Solapur for the offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- or in default rigorous imprisonment for one year imposed upon the appellant upon conclusion of Sessions Case No.52 of 1996 before him.

(2.) FACTS which are material for deciding this Appeal are as under :- On 8th July, 1992, a Sub-inspector of State Excise raided the shop of the appellant where the appellant was alleged to be selling an Ayurvedic medicine by name Janardan Kadha. Bottles of the said medicine were seized and sealed in presence of panchas. The sub-inspector lodged the bottles with his superior i.e. inspector of State Excise, who sent one of the bottles to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Pune. The Forensic Science Laboratory reported that the sample contains Diazepam which is at Sr.No.43 in the Schedule to the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The Sub-inspector of State Excise then filed a charge sheet against the appellant as also the manufacturer of said Kadha one Vijaykumar Narayan Yemul.

(3.) CONSIDERING this lacuna along with the fact that carrier of the sample to Forensic Science Laboratory, Pune was not examined, it would be hazardous to conclude that the sample analyzed by the Laboratory was of the material which was allegedly seized from the shop of the appellant. The learned Sessions Judge should, therefore, have seen that the report could not be connected to the property allegedly seized from the appellants shop and should have extended benefit of doubt to the appellant.