LAWS(HPH)-2014-10-72

YASH PAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

Decided On October 20, 2014
YASH PAL Appellant
V/S
STATE OF H.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment as they arise from a common judgment. The aforesaid appeals are preferred by the appellants/accused against the judgment, rendered on 23.10.2010, by the learned Special Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushehr, H.P., in NDPS Act Case No. 06 of 2009, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/ - for theirs having committed offence punishable under Section 20 read with 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (herein -after referred to as 'NDPS Act'). In default of payment of fine, they have been sentenced to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 11.10.2008, the police party headed by SI/SHO Gurbachan Singh, while patrolling at Chalohan Nalla, Police Station, Ani, a person was intercepted carrying a bag over his shoulder. On inquiry, he disclosed his name to be Raj Kumar alias Raju. The police after seeking his option for his personal search either before the Magistrate or the Gazetted Officer, he opted for his search before the police. Thereafter, the police also offered their search to the accused. On checking the bag of Raj Kumar, charas kept in a polythene was found and on weighing the same, it was found to be 4 kgs. Two samples of 25 grams each were taken out of the same and were sealed separately in separate packets. The remaining charas was put into a separate sealed packet and took into possession after filling up NCB form in the presence of the witnesses. FIR was registered on the basis of rukka sent to the police station. During the course of investigation, it was found that accused Yashpal had engaged accused Raj Kumar for carrying the charas as the call details to the mobile phone recovered from accused Raj Kumar disclosed the frequent calls between both of them immediately before the occurrence.

(3.) THE accused/appellants were charged for theirs having committed offence punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act, by the learned trial Court, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.