LAWS(BOM)-2013-8-311

MEHARUNNISSA FAROOQ SHAIKH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On August 28, 2013
Meharunnissa Farooq Shaikh Appellant
V/S
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the conviction of the appellant by the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act at Mumbai for offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w Section 20(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, "NDPS Act") and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year imposed upon the appellant by the learned Judge on the conclusion of trial of Special Case No. 98 of 2006. Facts which are relevant for deciding this appeal are as under:--

(2.) The raiding party came back with the appellant to the Cuffe Parade office of the Anti-Narcotic Cell. WPSI Parab caused the property to be sent to the Store Keeper at Azad Maidan Store. She also sent a detailed report. One of the members, PSI Mane, filed a report on which an offence was registered bearing Crime No. 37 of 2006. The Police Constable who had carried the property to Azad Maidan Store had lodged it with the Store Keeper who entered the property in the register. On 27-2-2006 the same Constable carried the property to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The Laboratory reported eventually that the same was of Ganja. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was sent to the Court of Special Judge for trial of cases under the NDPS Act.

(3.) The learned Judge charged the appellant of possession of 30 kgs. of Ganja, punishable under Section 20(ii)(C) r/w Section 8(c) of the NDPS Act and since the appellant pleaded not guilty, she was put on trial at which the prosecution examined in all five witnesses in its attempt to bring home the guilt of the appellant. After considering their evidence in the light of defence of denial, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforementioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is before this Court.