TIMAL RAUT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole appellant of this appeal has been convicted under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and fine of Rs. One lac.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 6.2.96 at 6.30 a.m. Anil Kumar of village Nurakhap Nayatola within Bettiah Muffasil RS. of West Champaran district saw the appellant carrying 'Charas ' in two bags. He with the help of co -villagers tried to apprehend him. The appellant, however, fled and hid himself in a sugarcane field. He was finally apprehended and brought to the house of Vijay Kumar. On information S.I. Mahadeo Sah of Bettiah Muffasil P.S. came to the village and recorded the statement of Anil Kumar to the above effect at 10 a.m. He took custody of the appellant as well as the packets said to have been recovered from him. The pockets -five each in two bags ''were opened by S.I. Mahadeo Sah in presence of the villagers. They were weighed and seizure memo was prepared. He recorded the statements of the witnesses, sent the articles to the Forensic Science Laboratory and on receipt of the report, observing other formalities, submitted chargesheet against the appellant thus putting him on trial.

(3.) SHRI Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the appellant was falsely implicated in the case on account of land dispute with Anil Kumar and others. There is no conclusive evidence that the article which was allegedly seized from the appellant was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and that what was subjected to chemical analysis was the article allegedly seized from the appellant. Counsel pointed out that the Investigating Officer was now examined and, therefore, it is not known as to how the article seized by the police was dealt with after seizure. Shambhu Singh Versus State Of Bihar