SADOT BRITTO CARVALHO Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED in Special Criminal Case No. 13/93 on the file of the Court of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Mapusa, filed these appeals against the conviction and sentence under Section 27 (a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The accused No. 1 filed Appeal No. 5 of 1994 and accused No. 2 filed Appeal No. 6 of 1994. Since these two appeals arise out of a common judgment, I heard both the appeals together and disposing these appeals by this common judgment.

(2.) THE facts of the case can be stated in brief as hereinafter shown:

(3.) THE first ground of attack levelled against judgment under appeal is that even charge has not been properly framed in conformity with the sections. It is argued that the accused were found in possession of 1.1 gram of Charas from the Pant pocket of Sadot Carvalho, accused No. 1. If this is the case of the prosecution, the charge is not clear what is the role of the other accused, how the other accused is involved in the offence. It is also clear in the charge that they were jointly possessing that drug. It is also argued that the charge has been framed without proper application of mind because it is not clear in the charge whether the small quantity is for personal consumption or for sale.