STATE OF J&K Vs. GHULAM SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This acquittal appeal is directed against the order dated 30.10.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Doda (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in File No. 51/Challan titled State v. Ghulam Shah , whereby the trial court has acquitted the respondent of the charge under sections 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 25.9.2003, the SHO, Police Station, Doda who was on patrolling duty of Doda town alongwith Deputy Superintendent of Police received information from a reliable source that the respondent was running the business of charas and at that point of time also, was possessing the same for the sale. On this information, the house of the respondent was raided by the SHO concerned along with other police personnel and on being questioned, the respondent disclosed that he had concealed charas beneath the dung in his kitchen garden. Accordingly, the docket was sent to the Police Station, Doda whereupon the FIR No. 148/2003 came to be registered against the respondent under sections 8/20 of the Act. It is the further case of the prosecution that during the course of investigation, the respondent made his disclosure statement, which led to the discovery of 03 kg. of charas beneath the dung near his house. It was found packed in polythene. On weighing, it was found to be Three (03) Kgs Fifty (50) grams out of the recovered contraband was taken out as sample, which was sealed and resealed and then sent for chemical examination. The statements of witnesses under section 161 Cr PC were recorded and upon completion of the investigation, the challan was presented before the trial court. The charges were framed against the respondent under sections 8/20 of the Act. Since the respondent pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried, as such, the prosecution was directed by the trial court to commence its evidence. The prosecution examined all the witnesses named in the challan and after the closure of the evidence, the statement of the respondent in terms of section 342 Cr.PC was recorded. The respondent denied all the allegations and stated that no charas had been recovered from him and that he had been falsely implicated by Mohd. Amin, ASI who was inimical to him. The learned trial court after appreciating the evidence of the prosecution and noticing glaring contradictions in the prosecution story, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to establish the charge against the respondent beyond all reasonable doubts and, therefore, acquitted the respondent of the charges by giving the respondent the benefit of doubt.

(3.) The State is aggrieved of the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court and has challenged the same primarily on the ground that the trial court has failed to appreciate the evidence that has come on record in proper perspective. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that it was in pursuance of the disclosure statement made by the respondent, recovery of more than 03 Kg of charas was affected from the kitchen garden of the respondent and this was sufficient to establish the involvement of the respondent in the commission of the offence under section 8/20 of the Act.