STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. GANGA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State has appealed against the judgment dated 26.6.2008 of the learned Special Judge (II), Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, passed in Sessions Trial No.22 of 2004, titled as State of H.P. v. Ganga Ram, challenging the acquittal of respondent Ganga Ram (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who stands charged for having committed offence punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) It is the case of prosecution that on 18.8.2004, Shri N.K. Sharma (PW-9), Inspector/SHO Police Station, Sadar, District Mandi, alongwith Police Party, consisting of ASI Yog Raj (PW-1), HC Jagdish, HC Ram Lal and Constable Pardeep Kumar (PW-5), had set up a Naka at Kommand Bridge. At about 3 a.m., they saw accused come from Riagari side in the light of a torch. Seeing the police party, he tried to flee away, however, on suspicion he was apprehended. Accused was carrying a bag on his shoulder, which was searched, from which Charas was recovered. The same was taken into possession vide Memo (Ex. PW- 1/A). Ruka (Ex. PW-2/A) was prepared and sent through Constable Pardeep Kumar (PW-5) for registration of the case, on the basis of which FIR No.302, dated 18.8.2004 (Ex. PW-2/B), under the provisions of Section 20 of the Act, was registered at Police Station Sadar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. In the morning, recovered stuff was weighed in the shop of Makhan Singh (PW-7) at village Kommand, which was found to be 1 kg. Two samples, each weighing 25 grams, were drawn. Samples as also remaining stuff were sealed with seal impression 'N'. NCB form was filled in triplicate. Accused was arrested, after he was apprised of his rights. The sample seal was handed over to ASI Yog Raj (PW-1). Inspector N.K. Sharma (PW-9) handed over the case property alongwith NCB forms, through HC Jagdish Kumar (not examined) to MHC Baldev Singh (PW-8). The samples were sent for chemical analysis and report (Ex. PX) obtained to this effect. Investigation revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime. Hence, challan was presented in the Court for trial.

(3.) Accused was charged for having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Act to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.