PORE SINGH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal from the Jail has been preferred by the accused challenging his order of conviction under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the Act') as per the impugned judgment dated 20.6.1997 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Sambalpur.

(2.) ACCORDING to the case of the prosecution on 1.7.1996 while performing town patrolling duty in the Badbazar locality in Camuaipur town Sri Amaresh Kumar Panigrahi, Sub -Inspector of Police (P.W.6) alongwith Havildar Sri Ramchandra Dehury (P.W.4) and some police Constables noticed suspicious conduct of the Appellant and the letter's attempt to run away from that area after seeing the Police. Therefore, on the basis of suspicion the patrolling police party chased and captured the Appellant. That occurrence raised curiosity of some passersby which includes Susanta Kumar Purohit (P.W.1), Rajesh Pandey (P.W.2), Binod Kumar Sahu (P.W.5) and Ors. and therefore all such persons remained present at the spot where the Appellant was caught by the patrolling party. P.W.6 expressing his intention to conduct a search of the Appellant ascertained from him whether he wanted to be searched in presence of a Magistrate and in that respect a written consent was given by the Appellant (Ext.4) permitting P.W.6 to conduct the search, P.W.6 conducted the search citing P.Ws. 1 and 5 as the witnesses to the seizure. In course of that search he could trace opium kept in a polythene packet on the inner side of the underwear of the Appellant. Therefore on the direction of P.W.6. P.W.4 went and requested a shopkeeper Mohanlal Agrawalla (P.W.3) to come to the spot with weighing scale arid weight. On the arrival of P.W.3 he made weighment of the seized article on the request of P.W.6 and found the polythene packet containing 225 gm. of opium. P.W.6 drew samples of 24 gm. each in two packets and seized all the three packets containing opium and sealed the same both with the paper seal containing signature of the witnesses and L.T.I. of the accused and also sealing by wax by affixing brass seal (M.O.III). P.W.6 gave that M.O.III in zima of P.W.5 who Executed zimanama Ext. 3. P.W.3 also made a statement Ext. 2 relating to the manner in which he made weighment and Ext. 1 is the seizure list. The aforesaid occurrence took place in the evening hours at about 6 p.m. On 2.7 1996 P.W.6 took prompt step for forwarding the seized sample packets for chemical analysis with proper requisition from the Court. The Director, RFSL. Ainttsapalli, Samoalpur sent the report of the outcome of the chemical analysis (Ext. 8) giving opinion that brownish black soft mass sent in the sample packets was opium containing 2.28% of' morphine having the intoxicant capability. All such evidence was produced before the trial Court at the time of trial. In course of the trial P.W.1 who was a witness to the search and seizure and also P.W.2 who as also present at the time of search and seizure but did not sign as a witness in the seizure list declined any knowledge about the search, seizure and recovery though P.W.1 admitted his signature on the seizure list Ext. 1. On the other hand, P.Ws. 3 to 6 consistently and corroborating supported the prosecution to prove the charge under Section 18 of the Act against the Appellant. On an analysis of such evidence the trial Court found the Appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 18 of the Act for possessing 225 grams of opium without any valid licence and permit and therefore sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/ - (one lakh) i.e., the minimum sentence provided under Section 18 of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED Addl. Govt. Advocate while repelling the aforesaid argument supports the impugned judgment of conviction and prays to maintain the order of conviction.