BHARATLAL Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is absconding since more than a year in crime no.0003/2009 registered under section 8 / 15 of the NDPS Act and 34(2) of the Excise Act at police station Kalukheda District Ratlam has invoked extra- ordinary powers of this Court conferred under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing the FIR (no.0003/19) dated 02.01.2019, in which he has been impleaded as a co-accused.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, the police received secret information that one Banshilal S/o Bagdiram Porwal in loading some illegal contraband in his Scorpio un-numbered jeep from his house situated in village Richa Deveda to deliver it to some smugglers. Acting on this secret information, the police reached on the spot and found two persons loading something in an un- numbers Scorpio jeep. Seeing the police, they both tried to run away but one of them, got caught by the police, while other one fled away. The accused caught on the spot, revealed his name as Banshilal S/o Bagdiram Porwal. The police recovered 8 plastic sacks, containing 90 bulk liters of illicit liquor and 176 kg of illegal poppy straw. On search of the house, the police found 253 kg illegal poppy straw kept in 11 sack. Banshilal disclosed in his memo under section 27 of the Evidence Act the name of the petitioner, as the person fled away from the spot.

(3.) The petitioner is absconding till date. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the disclosure statement recorded under section 27 of the evidence act of co- accused is not admissible in evidence and there is no other evidence to implead the petitioner in the case. The police have impeaded him against the settled principles of law, therefore, the FIR be quashed against him.