CHHOTE LAL RAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment / Order dated 20.7.2010/29.7.2010, whereunder the Additional Sessions Judge VII, Patna, has convicted the sole appellant for the offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in Special Case No.26 of 2006 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 years, 15 years, 15 years with direction to pay fine of Rs.1 lac 50 thousands each under the three counts respectively. In default of payment of fine, appellant has been directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three years under each count. The sentences, however, has been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) PROSECUTION case as set out in the complaint filed by the Intelligence Officer, Salman Imtiyaz Hussaini (P.W.2) is that acting upon specific information, Daya Shankar Singh (P.W.4), Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna, reached Reliance Petrol Pump at Chakia on 20.5.2006 at 4 A.M. for intercepting the truck bearing Registration No.BR 1G 4689 arranged the witnesses. Having seen the truck coming from Raxaul side P.W.4 and other members of the team signaled the driver of the truck to stop but he speeded up the truck and began driving the truck dangerously. The team chased the truck for about 15 20 kilometers and then succeeded in stopping the vehicle. The driver jumped out of the vehicle but was apprehended. On enquiry, driver revealed his name and address as Sri Chhote Lal Rai (appellant), son of Shri Nand Lal Rai, resident of Mithapur, Gaya Line, Patna. The truck was found covered with tarpaulin. During enquiry, the driver claimed the truck to be empty. On further enquiry as to why did he ignore the signal to stop and began driving the truck dangerously, the driver stated that he thought anti social elements were chasing him. The team members asked the driver to remove tarpaulin cover from the truck and found number of rectangular shaped bundle wrapped in plastic sheet kept in the body of the truck. After cutting one bundle, it was found that Ganja was packed in the bundle. During inspection of the truck, passersby began to collect at the spot. The driver then requested the officers to carry out detailed search and to complete other formalities in a safe place for his security, safety. The truck, driver, the two independent witnesses came to the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna, on 20.5.2006 around 11 A.M.. After observing the formalities the tarpaulin of the truck bearing Registration No.BR 1G 4689 was removed before the independent witnesses and 23 bundles of Ganja was recovered, weighed and found to be 370 Kilograms (Net). The samples drawn, recovered Ganja sealed with the official seal of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence before the independent witnesses. According to the complainant, the then Intelligence Officer, DRI, Regional Unit, Patna, Daya Shankar Singh (P.W.4) seized the recovered 370 Kilograms (Net) Ganja valued at Rs.7,40,000/ , the vehicle bearing Registration No.BR 1G 4689 valued at Rs.3,50,000/ used for transportation of Ganja in exercise of power conferred under Section 43(a) of the Act having reason to believe that it is liable for confiscation. Appellant, the owner of the vehicle, was driving the vehicle in which the recovered Ganja was concealed to his full knowledge as he agreed to transport the same from Semra to Jarua for lust of money and admitted his guilt. Appellant, therefore, was arrested at 11.30 hours on 21.5.2006 by Daya Shankar Singh (P.W.4) in exercise of power conferred under Section 43(b) of the Act and was produced before the Sessions Judge on 21.5.2006 and was remanded to judicial custody on 21.5.2006. The samples drawn was sent to the Deputy Chief Chemist, Government Opium and Alkaloid Works, Gazipur (U.P.), who vide letter F. No.1/Research/2006 07/3982 dated 8/10.07.2006 reported that on the basis of the macroscopic, microscopic and chromatographic examinations it was concluded that sample under reference is Ganja (cannabis) within the meaning of the Act. In the light of the aforesaid facts, material collected during investigation, Intelligence Officer recommended prosecution of the appellant for the offence under Sections 20, 25 and 29 of the Act.

(3.) IN the light of the complaint, the District and Sessions Judge, took cognizance of the offence under order dated 3.11.2006 and proceeded with the trial.