MAJID BAIG NASER BAIG Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by accused who was convicted for offence under sections 20 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic substances Act and is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 5 years.

(2.) Few facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows : on 14-7-2005 Head Constable Vinayak was on patrolling duty along with other policemen. When they came near the Head Post Office they found a person coming from opposite side. He was carrying a bag in his hand. He was accosted. He was asked his name and place of residence and was also asked about the contents of the bag. He told that it contains Ganja. There was also one shawl in the bag. After removal of the shawl a nylon bag smelling Ganja was found. The accused was therefore brought to the police station. Head Constable Mr. Tale handed over the accused to API Chakre and lodged a report. API Chakre then sent an information to his superior and took search of the accused. It was found that the bag contained 5 Kg. 200 Gms. of Ganja. Therefore, he called two panchas and one Dinesh Thakre with weights and balance. Sample of Ganja was taken, it was sealed in presence of the panchas with their signatures and that of the API. Panchanama was drawn. Before taking search, it is alleged that accused was informed whether he is willing to have his search before Gazetted Officer. The accused declined and permitted the search to be taken in the absence of gazetted Officer. The samples were taken and sent to the Chemical Analyser. It was reported that sample contained Ganja. An inventory was also prepared which was also sent to Judicial Magistrate to certify its correctness. After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was filed against the accused.

(3.) The Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty. Upon recording of the evidence Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence under sections 20 and 22 of the N. D. P. S. Act and sentenced him to imprisonment for a period of 5 years. Being aggrieved by that order this appeal has been preferred.