BHANU MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE guards of Seema Suraksha Bal( S.S.B) watching Into-Nepalese border, were on surveillance at a particular point at no man's land, as indicated in Ext.3, the written report filed by P.W.1 Inspector Tapas Sen Gupta of S.S.B. before the Officer-in-charge of Sursand Police Station. It was a foggy evening. Three persons appeared coming from Nepal into India. THEy were challenged. One of them threw the bundle he was carrying and retreated back to the Nepalese border with his other companion. One Bhanu Mandal had ingressed into India and he was apprehended by P.W.1. On looking into the contents of the two bags P.W.1 and his companion personnel of S.S.B. came to find that it was Ganja. THE appellant was arrested.

(2.) THE written report(Ext.3) along with the present appellant was presented before the Officer-in-charge of Sursand Police Station on the basis of which F.I.R. (Ext.4) of Sursand Police Station Case No.17 of 2006 was drawn up. THE investigation was entrusted to P.W.4, A.S.I. Hridyanand Mahto. P.W.4 investigated the case, as may appear from his evidence, inspected the place of occurrence, recorded the statements of the witnesses and drew up sample of 100 grams of seized Ganja for forwarding the same to the Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis and report as regards the chemical contains of the seized substance. On completion of investigation, he sent up the present appellant for trial.

(3.) AS may appear from the lower court records, the sampled article was being sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory belatedly and the Special Judge who was allowing forwarding of the sampled article to the Forensic Science Laboratory was issuing necessary direction to the Superintendent of police, Sitamarhi, to obtain an explanation from P.W. 4 A.S.I., Hridyanand Mahto as to why he was so indifferent on complying with the law as regards the quick dispatch of the sampled article to the Forensic Science Laboratory. The date of occurrence in the present case was 13.2.2006 and the Special Judge was requested to direct dispatch of the sampled article to the Forensic Science Laboratory on 31.3.2006, i.e., after one month and eighteen days. What is further found by this Court is that the report after chemical analysis of the sampled article was prepared by the Forensic Science Laboratory on 14.10.2008, i.e., after more than two years of having received the sampled article. One could simply refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in Valsala Vs. State of Kerala reported in 1994 Cri.L.J.1 in which the Supreme Court was acquitting the appellant in that case on the ground of delay in sampling, dispatch and preparation of the chemical analysis report.