ABDUL HAMID Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "The Code") has been preferred against the judgment dated 18/11/2009 passed in Sessions Trial No. 04/2006, by Special Judge (Narcotics) Indore, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo 15 years R.I and to pay a fine of Rs. 1.50 lakhs and in default further to suffer R.I for 2 1/2 years.

(2.) The prosecution story in short is that on 30/12/2005, at about 9.45 pm, Shri. R.S. Amb (P.W.8), S.H.O, Police-Station Sadar Bazaar, District Indore, received a secret information that appellant/accused Abdul Hamid, a resident of Bhopal is having 'charas' with him and he will reach Imili bazaar shortly. After complying with the necessary formalities, the police force reached Imili Bazaar Square. Later on, they found a person coming from Rambagh Square, who was having a bag in his hand. When the person was stopped and enquired about his name and whereabouts, he informed that his name is Abdul Hamid, resident of Bhopal. Thereafter, the appellant/accused was briefed about the secret information and on consent being given by the appellant/accused, search was carried out. During search, total quantity of 4.484 kgs of 'charas' was recovered from the bag of the appellant/accused. After completing necessary formalities police arrested the appellant and registered F.I.R at crime No. 403/2005 under Section 8/20 of 'the Act'. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) Appellant/accused was charged for offence under Section 8/20(C) read with Section 31 of 'the Act'. He abjured his guilt and took a plea that he has been falsely implicated in the mater. During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and has exhibited 27 documents in order to bring home the charges against the appellant/accused. Const. Manoj and Const. Ramprakash were examined as D.W.1 and D.W.2. Trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence adduced by the parties, pronounced the judgment on 18th November, 2009 and concluded that the appellant is liable to be convicted for commission of offence and sentenced him as stated herein-above.