BHURA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 11/9/1996 passed by the Special Judge under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Chhattarpur in Special Case No.141/1994, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short "NDPS Act") and sentenced for three years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.3,000/-. In default of payment of fine, six months' RI was also directed.

(2.) THE prosecution's case, in short, is that on 30.10.1994 SHO of Police Station Sarvai Shri Mukesh Tiwari (PW-6) went to arrest one Laxman Lohar in his area. During his visit, he was intimated that the appellant had grown some plants of Ganja in his house situated at Khaminkheda (Police Station Sarvai District Chhattarpur). He called the independent witnesses Narayan (PW-3) and Seva (PW-4) and went to the house of the appellant. He gave a notice to the appellant for search of his house and with the consent of the appellant, a search took place. In the courtyard he found two big plants and four small plants of Ganja. He also found that some Ganja leaves were lying on a jute bag to make them dry. A memo of search was prepared. All the six plants and dried leaves etc. of Ganja were seized by a seizure memo Ex.P-5. The appellant was arrested. The seized Ganja was sealed and it was sent to the Excise Sub Inspector, Laundi for examination of the substance. The Excise Sub Inspector examined the property and gave a report Ex.P-12. He found that the seized property was Ganja. Thereafter the seized property was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar with a letter Ex.P-13 dated 21.11.1994. The FSL, Sagar in its report Ex.P-14 found that all the plants were of Ganja and dried leaves etc. were also of Ganja. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the Special Judge, Chhattarpur.

(3.) THE learned Special Judge after considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act and sentenced as mentioned above.