SANTOSH Vs. THE STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal preferred under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. is directed against judgment and order dated 27.12.2004 rendered by Special Judge (Narcotics), Indore in Special Case No.28/01, whereby appellant Santosh @ Surajpal Khalsa has been convicted under Section 8 r/w Section 20(B) & 2(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (for short the Act) and has been sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo 3 years R.I.

(2.) The prosecution story, as having emerged during trial, briefly stated, is that on 29/08/2001, Ranjeetsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9), the then Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Station-Chandan Nagar, Indore received a secret information that a person of given description having Charas in his possession is standing near Tiraha, Jawahar Tekri, Sinhasa Road and is about to go to dispose of the same to someone. Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9) recorded this information in daily diary and prepared Panchnama Ex.P/2 in this regard, a copy whereof along with copy of daily diary entry No.2846 was sent through Constable Hemraj (P.W.3) to C.S.P. Pandrinath. Thereafter Ranjit Singh Bhadoria (P.W.9) with the police party, proceeded to the spot in a jeep bearing registration No.M.P.-09-592. Two Panch witnesses namely, Indersingh (P.W.7) and Mulchand (P.W.8) were also taken who were apprised about the secret information. On reaching the spot, Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9) sighted the appellant standing near Tiraha. On interrogation, he revealed his name as Santosh @ Surajpal. Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9) apprised the appellant about the secret information and further apprised him that he has to search him and he has a legal right to get himself searched in presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate or he may give a search to him. The appellant agreed for being searched by Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9). In this regard, memo (Ex.P/1) was prepared. Thereafter, the appellant was searched in which a polythene packet was found inserted inside the Pant near the waist containing blackish material with pungent smell. On physical examination, the same was found to be Charas. On weighment, it came to be 990 grams. Two samples each of 24 grams were drawn from the material and the samples as well as the remaining material were duly sealed separately and seized from the possession of the appellant, vide seizure memo (Ex.D/2). Memo (Ex.P/12) was also prepared in this regard. The appellant was arrested vide arrest memo (Ex.P/13) after being apprised about the reasons of arrest. Thereafter Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9) along with seized property and the appellant came to Police Station-Chandan Nagar. The property was handed over to Kamal Singh Solanki (P.W.4), In-charge of Malkhana. First Information Report (Ex.P/20) was registered in this regard against the appellant. A sealed sample packet marked A/1 was sent for forensic examination to Regional Forensic Laboratory, Indore, vide memo (Ex.P/21). The Assistant Chemical Examiner of Regional Forensic Laboratory, vide report Ex.P/1 opined that the material found in the sealed packet A/1 is Charas.

(3.) After usual investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the appellant before the Competent Court. The learned Special Judge framed a charge under Section 8 r/w Section 20(B) & 2(B) of the Act against the appellant, who abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried. The defence has been that of false implication on account of past enmity. The prosecution in order to bring the home examined as many as 9 witnesses in support of its case including A.S.I. Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9), Indersingh (P.W.7) and Mulchand (P.W.8) are said to be the Panch witnesses, while Head Constable Kamal Singh Solanki (P.W.4) is officer-in-charge, Malkhana. Apart this, documents Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/23 were also marked in evidence. The circumstances appearing against the appellant in the prosecution evidence were brought to his notice during his examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The appellant either denied or expressed innocence with regard to most of the circumstances. The appellant pleaded that he has been falsely implicated in this case by the police on account of his past enmity with the police. He submitted that he was picked up on 28.08.2001 by Ranjitsingh Bhadoria (P.W.9) and two other police officers from the house of one Lalsingh of village-Vishnawda and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Lalsingh (D.W.1) and Mohd. Raees (D.W.2) were examined in defence. Apart this, documents Ex.D/1, D/2 & D/3 were also marked.