JAGANNATH PASWAN @ JAGARNATH PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The solitary appellant Jagannath Paswan @ Jagarnath Paswan was put on trial by framing charges against him under Sections 20(C), 22(C) and 23(C) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances(NDPS) Act by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge. West Champaran at Bettiah and by judgement dated the 3rd of November, 2009 was found guilty of committing the said offences. While passing the sentence on 5.11.2009 the learned Judge directed the appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, else, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years on each of the three counts. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The appellant appeals against the above judgement of conviction and order of sentence which was passed against him.

(2.) The informant (PW 6) is the A.S.I. of police who was deputed in connection with maintaining law and order in Chanpatia police camp along with a contingent of police force. He stated that he had left his camp to wander around so as to maintaining law and order and in that course picked up some secret information that 5-6 persons had arrived at the house of the present appellant with ganja and were present at the residence of the present appellant. The informant stated that he along with his police force went to the house of the appellant. Seeing the police party coming, persons who had arrived at the house of the appellant started to run away into the fields in the darkness and could not be caught by the police.

(3.) The informant stated that he started searching the house of the appellant and while searching a thatched house which was probably used as a cattle shed, he found 11 packets made of five gunny bags lying under the heap of straw. The packets were recovered and it was stated that each packet was weighing about 20 K.Gs. and it appeared that the packets were containing ganja. The informant stated that he solicited the opinion of the other persons also on his above inference, he had drawn regarding the contents of the packets and his inference was fortified by the opinions of others. The informant alleged that it was this appellant who had consciously concealed the packets along with 5-6 others who had run away so as to smuggling it across the Indo-Nepalese Border.