NANCY TEMBO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed by the appellant-original accused against the judgment and order dated 30.7.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge for Greater Mumbai in N.D.P.S. Special Case No. 74 of 2009. By the said judgment and order, the learned Special Judge convicted the appellant under Sections 21(c) r.w. 8(c) and 28 r/w 23 r/w 21(c) and 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "N.D.P.S. Act"). For the offence under Section 21(c) read with 8(c), the appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for fifteen years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- i/d S.I. for six months. For the offence under Section 28 read with Section 23 read with Section 21(c) and 8(c), the appellant has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for fifteen years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- i/d S.I. for six months. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as under:

(2.) Charge came to be framed against the appellant under Sections 29 read with 8(c) and 21(c), 21(c) read with 8(c) and 28 read with 23, 21(c) and 8(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. The defence of the appellant was that of total denial and false implication. It is her further defence that the drugs were planted on her. After going through the evidence adduced in the present case, the learned Special Judge convicted the appellant under sections 21(c) read with 8(c) and 28 read with 23 read with 21(c) and 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and sentenced the appellant thereunder as stated in paragraph No. 1 above, hence, this appeal.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the Union of India. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Special Judge and the evidence on record, we are of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be acquitted. This appeal can be disposed of only on one point i.e. noncompliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act and we are not touching any other point in the present case.