STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SITA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge herein is to the judgment dated 30.4.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, exercising the powers of Special Judge under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act', in short), whereby the respondents (hereinafter to be referred as 'the accused') have been acquitted of the charge framed under Sections 20, 29, 61 of the Act against each of them.

(2.) The legality and validity of the judgment under challenge in this appeal has been assailed on several grounds, however, mainly that learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the prosecution evidence in its right perspective and to the contrary based the findings of acquittal on surmises and conjectures. The evidence as has come on record by way of the testimony of PW-1 ASI Gian Chand and PW-9 ASI Veena (I.O.) has erroneously been brushed aside and undue weightage has been given to the testimony of PW-2 Rakesh Kumar, who allegedly turned hostile to the prosecution. The present, therefore, is stated to be not a case where two views emerge on record and rather from the cogent and reliable evidence as has come by way of the testimony of police officials PW-1 and PW-9 and also the link evidence, the prosecution allegedly satisfactorily pleaded and proved its case against the accused and as such the impugned judgment has been sought to be quashed and the accused to be convicted.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General while drawing our attention to the oral as well as documentary evidence and also the impugned judgment has forcefully contended that the recovery of the Charas weighing 4 Kg. 847 grams stands satisfactorily proved from the physical and conscious possession of the accused persons and according to him, they both have been erroneously acquitted of the charge.