KERRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant, being aggrieved by his conviction for offences under sections 8(c) and 20(b)(i) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act and sentence of R.I. for three months and fine of Rs. 200/-, in default to suffer R.I. for 7 days by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in S.T. No. 60/95 by judgment dated 8-8-1995, has preferred this appeal.

(2.) According to the prosecution the officer-in-charge of the Police Station PW 4 Balbir Singh received a secret information that the appellant had stored contraband Garya for sale and receiving the aforesaid information, search of the house of the appellant was made and in that search 3.300 Kgs. Of Gary was recovered. The officer-incharge after investigating the case submitted charge sheet against the appellant and he was put on trial for offence under Section 8(c) read with Section 20 (b) (i) of the N.D.P.S. Act Appellant denied to have committed any offence and his plea was that he has been falsely implicated in the case.

(3.) In support of its case the prosecution has altogether examined four witnesses. PW. 1 Jaganraj Singh is a Head Constable who has proved the various Roznamchas pertaining to secret information, recovery of Garya from appellant as also information to the higher officers of the police administration. PW. 2 Fulchand and PW 3 Pratipal are the witnesses to the seizure and although they have signed the seizure memo but have stated in their evidence that the seizures were not effected in their presence and they have been declared hostile by the prosecution. P.W. 4 Balbir singh isT the officer-in-charge of the Police Station. He has stated in his evidence that after receiving the secret information he had gone to the house of the appellant and stated his intention to search the house. He has further stated in his evidence that after the appellant gave the consent, search of the house was made and Garya in separate covers were recorded.