MUNNALAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred the present appeal being aggrieved with the judgment dated 03.03.1997 passed by the Special Sessions Judge under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substance Act Satna in Special Case No. 15/96, whereby the appellant has been convicted of offence under Section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that on 08.01.1996, Sub -Inspector Vinod Kumar Singh (P.W.3), who was posted as SHO, Police Station Tala, District Satna received an intimation that the appellant who was having a shop of tea was selling Ganja from his shop. Shri Vinod Kumar Singh called constable Rajola Prasad, (P.W.4) and gave him a sum of Rs. 5/ - with the direction that he would go in plain clothes and purchase Ganja of that amount. Constable Rajola Prasad purchased Ganja and gave an indication then, Vinod Kumar Singh along with other witnesses went to the shop of the appellant and gave him a notice as to whether he was ready to get his search by Vinod Kumar Singh. After getting his consent on document, Ex. P/5, Vinod Kumar Singh and police party took search of the appellant Munnalal and prepared a document Ex. P/2. It was found that the appellant kept fourteen small packets of paper having Ganja. All the packets were given to Shri Manprasad Gupta for their weighing and total 300 grams of Ganja was found with the appellant. A sample of 20 grams of Ganja was taken separately and the entire property was seized along with the note of Rs. 5/ -. The sample of Ganja was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the Forensic Science Laboratory by it's report Ex. P/9 found that the sample contained Ganja. After due investigation a charge -sheet was filed before the Special Court.

(3.) THE Special Judge after considering the prosecution evidence convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.