RAMESH HALDAR Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has challenged the judgment dated 16 7 1998 passed by Shri H. C. Mohapatra, Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore in T. R. Case No. 36 of 1997 convicting him under section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 00, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.

(2.) PROSECUTION case, briefly stated, is as follows :

(3.) MR . Acharya, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Pradhan, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State, were heard at length. Mr. Acharya contended that the impugned judgment cannot be sustained in the eye of law and is liable to be set aside, inasmuch as on the same set of evidence while the wife of the appellant has been acquitted, the appellant has been convicted and that there is no clear, cogent and convincing evidence on record regarding exclusive and conscious possession ofcontraband Ganja by the appellant, Mr. Pradhan supported the impugned judgment contending that a conviction can be sustained on the basis of unimpeachable statements of official witnesses.