RINKU SONKAR ORS. Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved by the order dated 19.7.2019 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Jabalpur (M.P.) in Special Case No. 32/2019 framing charges under Section 8/20 (b) (ii-B) read with Section 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, it has been alleged that on 26.3.2019 Police Station Gohalpur District Jabalpur received the information from informer that one person namely Priyanka Choudhary having possession of smack is standing near the gate of Lema Garden and waiting for customers to sell the smack. On this information police went on the spot and allegedly seized 16 grams of Smack from the accused Priyanka Choudhary. On the basis of memorandum of accused Priyanka under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, the present applicants have been implicated and offence has been registered against Priyanka Choudhary as well as against the present applicants.

(3.) The Trial Court has framed the charges under Section 8/20(b) (ii-B) r/w Section 29 of NDPS Act against applicants. Applicants have filed present revision against order dated 19.7.2019 for framing of charge and their contention is that there is no evidence against the present applicants to connect him for an offence under Section 8/20(b) (ii-B) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act except memorandum of co-accused. They have clearly stated because the said co- accused has named the present applicants in the memorandum under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, they cannot be made accused and subjected to trial. They have categorically stated that there is no other evidence except the fact that their names find place in the memorandum given by the co-accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act wherein Priyanka Choudhary, the co- accused has stated before the police that it was the present applicants who have given the contraband to her.