LAWS(PAT)-2011-4-199

SATYA NARAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On April 15, 2011
SATYA NARAIN Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE solitary appellant has appealed against the judgment dated 27.01.2005 passed by the Ist Additional District & sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Muzaffarpur in Trial No.08 of 2004 by which he was found guilty of committing offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act(N.D.P.S.Act)and was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- else to suffer yet another term for one year of rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) A truck was intercepted and it was found loaded with pieces of plywoods. Amidst the plywood, 47 packets were found and each packet was found containing ganja. The packets were seized along with the truck and the consigned plywood. The total weight of ganja seized by the complainant who was the Central Intelligence Officer in the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Muzaffarpur was 603 K.Gs. A complaint was filed before the Special Judge, Muzaffarpur vide letter no.T.R.No.8/04(D.R.I.Case No.6 of 2001) dated 23.4.2001. The accused(appellant) who was the driver of the vehicle was arrested and he was also forwarded with the complaint petition to the court and was remanded to custody. Cognizance was taken and the accused was put on trial. What appears from the orders passed on different dates by the trial court was that it proceeded to record evidence before charge, i.e., evidence under Section 244 Cr.P.C. This appears from order dated 14.3.2002 and that procedure was followed up to 23.12.2004 when the charges were framed under Sections 20, 23 and 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act after perusal of the evidence recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the court below directed P.W.1 to be summoned for his cross- examination as per the provisions of Section 246 Cr.P.C. Ultimately, after examination of five witnessed during trial by adopting the same procedure just indicated, the learned trial Judge held the appellant guilty and passed the sentences as indicated in the first paragraph of the present judgment.