RENUKA RAJU DEVENDRA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) So far as the original judgment of conviction and sentence is concerned, hardly anything could have been said. This was a position as on the date of the judgment delivered by learmed Judge of the Special Court under NDPS at Bombay on 17th July, 1997. She was the appellant/accused. The Appellant/accused was found in possession of 36 small packets i.e. "Puddies" referred to in the said judgment. On examination, it was found that same were containing heroin.

(2.) SO far as the recovery is concerned, the panch witness is fully supported. The Chemical Analysers report confirms that the substance was Narcotic and was heroin. The sentence of 10 years and fine, as imposed under Section 21 read with section 8(c) of NDPS Act, 1985 by the Special Judge, NDPS Court, Mumbai, in Case No.189 of 1997, is thus mainly warranted.

(3.) IT is an admitted position that the notification as to the small quantity under Section 27 of the NDPS Act came to be issued in the year 1996 whereby the small quantity with reference to heroin which was originaly fixed at .25 grams was raised to 5 grams. It did appear from the record to this Court when it heard the matter on 7th August, 1998 that the change brought about the said notification was not to the knowledge of either to the prosecution or defence of trial Court. In fact, this was brought to the notice of this Court on behalf of the Appellant/Accused when her Advocate in Criminal Application No.2392 of 1998 was seeking direction. The direction sought was to the effect that the Appellant/Accused be permitted to lead additional evidence in light of the said notification.