BHIM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 22-11-1990 vide which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad held that the accused was guilty of an offence under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', and the recoveries effected contained 45.9% heroin and punished the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. one lac and in default thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant primarily is there was no compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the Act. There was also violation of Section 41 (1) of the Act. However, these contentions were half-heartedly advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. His main contention was that in view of the amended provisions of the Act, the quantity allegedly recovered from the accused is a small quantity and, thus, the punishment imposed is not commensurate to the provisions of law.

(2.) In order to examine the merits of the contentions raised before this Court and to avoid unnecessary repetition, reference to the prosecution case as noticed by the learned trial Court would be appropriate :-

(3.) In order to prove its case the prosecution had examined five witnesses, namely, PW-1 ASI Madan Lal, PW-2 Brahm Singh, PW 3 Mohinder Singh ASI, PW-4 and PW-5 constable Bal Krishan and Vijay Singh. Ex. PC memo of recovery, site plan Ex. PD, ruqqa Ex. PE was also proved on record. In furtherance to ruqqa Ex. PE which was sent to the police station, a formal FIR No. 367 dated 13-8-1989 Ex. P 8 was registered in the police station. In his statement under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code the accused had pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. However, no defence was led by the accused. The trial Court held that prosecution had been able to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt and consequently found the accused guilty and convicted and sentenced him as afore-mentioned.