SHRIKANT S ALKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 25th October, 1993, the Sessions Judge, South Goa, Margao, held the appellant guilty of an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and under his order dated 25.10.1993 he convicted him of that offence and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default, to suffer further R.I. for 6 months.

(2.) Having felt aggrieved by this decision, the appellant has preferred this appeal contending that his conviction as well as the quantum of sentence awarded to him were not warranted by law and that the learned Sessions Judge had failed to appreciate the evidence in a manner that was according to law. It is contended further that though the evidence of the panchas and the Police Officers examined at the trial was discrepant and not worthy of safe reliance for several reasons, the same was relied upon by the learned sessions Judge. It was also contended that the learned Sessions Judge had ignored the fact that the muddemal articles were not properly identified before the Court nor was it conclusively established before the Court that whatever was allegedly seized from the appellant was indeed Brown Sugar, as was contended by the prosecution. The argument advanced before us substantially related to the non-identification of the muddemal property before the Court, though several contradictions in the evidence were sought to be relied upon as material contradictions on account of which the evidence deserved to be disbelieved. It is prayed on behalf of the appellant that this appeal be allowed and the conviction and the sentence awarded to the appellant be set aside.

(3.) Mr. Bhobe, the learned Public Prosecutor, submitted that the case in question was proved by independent witnesses and the credibility of the said witnesses was never impugned effectively despite prolonged cross-examination. He submitted that the evidence of the two Police Officers, namely, P.W. No. 1 Head Constable Kerkar and P.W. No. 5 Police Sub-Inspector Gaonkar was sufficiently corroborated by independent evidence of the panchas and that, therefore, the guilt was rightly brought home to the appellant. It was submitted that when the conviction for the offence was upheld by the learned Sessions Judge, he had no option but to award to the appellant the minimum prescribed sentence of 10 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh.