STATE OF ORISSA Vs. KABI SANKAR MALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Government Appeal has been registered to scrutinize and find out the correctness of the order of acquittal on benefit of doubt granted by the Learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Puri to the accused/respondent in S.T. Case No. 52/266 of 1992 arising out of G.R. Case No. 70 of 1992 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Puri relating to offence under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drug Psychotropic Substances Act, 1995 (in short 'the N.D.P.S. Act') on the allegation of the accused being found in possession of 306 Milligrams of heroin in 9 packets, which was the grass weight.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 19.2.1992 at about 1.30 P.M. Shri Kalakar Sha, the then in -charge of the Temple Out Post, Puri Town on getting reliable informations about the accused selling heroin inside the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri, he made a Station Diary entry and conducted raid. Inside the temple premises, he chased and caught hold of accused/respondent who on the sight of the said Police Officer wanted to escape. The accused was searched by the said Kalakar Sha (P.W. No. 5) in presence of witnesses who have been examined as P.W. Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Amongst them P.Ws. 1 and 2 are two shop keeper inside the Temple premises and P.W. No. 3 is a Police Constable. After search and recovery of the Narcotics in paper packets service of a Goldsmith, name K.P. Sarma (P.W. No. 4) was requisitioned. He came and made weighment of the recovered packets and thereafter P.W. No. 5 seized that and a cash of Rs. 50/ - in presence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3. The O.I.C. of the Town P.S. then arrived at the Temple Out Post and he took charge of the investigation along with the accused and the seized goods in sealed packets. The seized Narcotics were sent for chemical analysis and a report (Ext. 5) was obtained to the effect that such articles was heroin. Accordingly the accused was charge sheeted and thereafter committed to face the trial in the manner already indicated.

(3.) ACCUSED took plea of complete denial and stated that a false case has been framed against him at the behest of P.W. Nos. 1 and 2 who were his erstwhile master because he was working in their shop. No defence evidence was adduced by the accused.