BHULAN DAS @ BHULAN RAVIDAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals cropped up from the same Special Case No. 24 of 2009 have been heard together for final disposal.

(2.) Both these appeals have been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 29.07.2011 and order of sentence dated 05.08.2011, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Patna, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 20 (b) (ii) (c) and Section 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter in short referred as "NDPS Act"). The appellants have been sentenced for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 years along with a fine of Rs. 1.5 lac each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three years R.I. Both the convicts were further sentenced to undergo 15 years R.I. and slapped with a fine of Rs. 1.5 lac each under Section 25 of the NDPS Act and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three years R.I. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.03.2009 the informant, Hari Shankar Jha (P.W.5) Sub-Inspector of Fatuha Police Station received secret information that huge quantity of Ganja has been concealed in the houses of the appellants, Gariban Ravidas and Bhulan Ravidas. On this information, informant along with Probationer Additional Superintendent of Police, Daljit Singh and other police personnel reached near the house of the appellants. Seeing the police party people started escaping. Thereafter, in presence of the independent witnesses, namely, Umesh Kumar (D.W.1) and Dhanesh Das (not examined) the house of the appellants were searched. During search 20 packets of Ganja wrapped in plastic was recovered from the house of Gariban Das. The ganja weighed 280 Kg. On search of house of Bhulan Das, 21 packets of Ganja wrapped in plastic bag along with two mobiles was recovered from his house. On measurement, the ganja weighed 294 Kg. Seizure list (Ext.1) of the contraband articles was prepared in presence of the independent witnesses. As both the accused persons as well as their family members were absconding, copy of the seizure list could not be handed over to them.