MOBIN @ PATAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties through their counsel.

(2.) The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 03/06/2017 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Ratlam(M.P.) in Sessions Trial No.04/2015 framing charges under Section 8/29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. As per the prosecution case, it has been alleged that on 09/07/2015 Police Station Barkheda Kala, Ratlam has intercepted one Yakub and from his possession 840 gm smack was recovered. On the basis of memorandum of Yakub under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the present applicant has been implicated and offence has been registered against Yakub as well as against the present applicant.

(3.) The trial Court has framed the charges and learned counsel has filed present revision against order dated 03/06/2017 and his contention is that there is no evidence against the present applicant to connect him for an offence under Section 8/21 and Section 29 of the NDPS Act. He has clearly stated because the said co-accused has named the present applicant in the memorandum under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, he cannot be made an accused and subjected to trial. He has categorically stated that there is no other evidence except the fact that his name finds place in the memorandum given by the co-accused under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act wherein Yakub the co-accused has stated before the police that it was the present applicant who has sold the contraband to him.