KHOOTI YADAV @ MUKHLAL YADAV Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SOLE appellant, Khooti Yadav @ Mukhlal Yadav has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 20B (II)C, 22C and 23C of the NDPS Act vide judgment dated 28.02.2012 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years as well as fine Rs.1,00,000/ -(one lac) in default thereof to undergo S .I. for two years additionally, respectively , under each counts with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently vide order dated 01.03.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, IIIrd ­cum - Special Judge, West Champaran at Bettiah in Purushottampur P.S. Case No.21 of 2009, Trial No.6 of 2010 is the subject matter of instant appeal.

(2.) PW -1, Harihar Prasad Singh, Officer - in -charge of Purushottampur P.S. recorded his own fardbeyan on 14 -07 -2009 at about 07:00 A.M. disclosing therein that after having been confidentially informed regarding carrying of Ganja by a person at Marjdawa Jeep Stand, the raiding party was constituted and arrived at Marjdawa Jeep Stand where, one person ran away seeing the police leaving behind a bundle. After opening of the aforesaid bundle 40 Kg. of Ganja kept in four packets were recovered in presence of Ramchandra Mahto (PW -4) and Rajendra Prasad Sah (PW -5) for which seizure list was prepared, on query, they came to know about the appellant who managed to escape. After registeration of Purushottampur P.S. Case No.21 of 2009 the investigation was entrusted to one of the member of the raiding team, namely, Mahendra Narrayan Paswan, ASI, who after concluding the same submitted charge sheet. The trial commenced and concluded by way of recording of conviction and sentence by the learned trial court hence this appeal.

(3.) FROM the lower court, it is evident that altogether six PWs have been e xamined, out of whom, PW -1 is informant, Harihar Prasad Singh, PW -2 Bijli Yadav, PW -3 Awadhesh Ram are the chowkidar who claimed themselves to be member of raiding party, PW -4 Ramchandra Mahto and PW -5 Rajendra Prasad Sah are the seizure list witnesses who, though admitted their presence on the seizure list, did not support the factum of recovery and on account thereof were declared hostile. PW -6, apart from the members of the raiding party happens to be the Investigating Authority. The prosecution had also exhibited seizure list Ext. -1, self -statement of PW -1, Ext. -2, Formal FIR Ext. -3, Signature of seizure list witnesses Ext. -4, 4/1, FSL report Ext. -5.