(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence pronounced on 11.11.2002 in Special case No. 18/01 by Special Judge (NDPS) Sagar, wherein each of the appellant is held guilty of having committed the offence punishable u/s 8/20(b)(1) of NDPS Act (herein-after referred to as the Act) and for aforesaid offence each of the appellant is sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/-, in default of which each of the appellant is sentenced to further undergo R.I. for a period of one year, the appellants have filed this appeal.
(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution on 6.9.01, sub-inspector Jairam Singh Solanki posted at P.S. Banda Distt. Sagar, received the information that the appellants Munna and Dilip are cultivating Ganja plants. After entering this information in Rojnamcha and informing the senior officers, Jairamsingh Solanki alongwith A.S.I., M.D. Shukla and other members of police force so also the independent witnesses Ramswaroop and Pappu, reached the spot of cultivation, where he seized 61 Ganja plants weighing 1 Kg. and 900 gms. from the possession of appellant Dilip and 81 Ganja plants from the possession of appellant Munna @ Abhay, which weighed 1 Kg. and 800gms. Separate samples weighing 50gms. were drawn and sealed from the quantity of Ganja seized from each of the appellant. The remaining quantity of Ganja was also separately sealed. The appellants were taken to custody and samples were sent to Forensic Science laboratory, Sagar, which returned the positive report.
(3.) IT is vehemently argued on behalf of the appellants that neither the fact of cultivation of Ganja plants by any of the appellant is proved nor could even the fact of possession of any of the appellants, of seized Ganja plants, could be established and hence they deserve to be acquitted. But, Karan (PW 9) whose land is situated on the other bank of Nala, which according to him demarcates his land and the land of appellants, has unambiguously supported the prosecution case by stating that the Ganja plants seized from each of the appellant were cultivated by each of them. He has stated to have witnessed the removal and seizure of Ganja plants, at the land belonging to the appellants and has specified the separate areas also, in which each of the appellant, is stated to have cultivated the Ganja plants.