AMBA LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Amba Lal s/o Prabhu Lal, b/c Baori, r/o Mangroda, Police Station, Rathanjana has filed this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.04.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No.57/2000 whereby he convicted the accused appellant under Sec. 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lac and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The brief facts of the case , for the disposal of this appeal are that on 03.06.2000, the appellant, while in custody in case No.26/2000 for offence under section 457 and 380 IPC, gave information under section 27 of the Evidence Act, to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Dhamotar to the effect that at about one and a half month earlier, he along with his companion, had stolen opium container from Opium Weighing Centre, Dhamotar. He further stated that out of stolen opium, part of opium which fell in his share, has been hidden by him in the field. The field was bought from Bheru Lal by his father Prabhu Lal. He further disclosed that he could get the said opium recovered. On this information, the SHO, Police Station, Dhamotar recorded the information and presented the accused Amba Lal, along with report, to the Police Station Rathanjana. The SHO, Police Station, Rathanjana, recorded the information under section 42 of the NDPS Act and forwarded it to the higher officers. The SHO, Police Station , Rathanjana proceeded to the field with the accused appellant Ambalal and there the accused dug the field from where two plastic bags containing 6 kgs and 7.2 Kgs. of opium were recovered. Two samples weighing 30 gms. each were taken out from the said bags and thereafter , after investigation, charge sheet was presented against the accused appellant. Charge was framed against the accused appellant for the offence under section 8/18 of the NDPS Act, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution at the trial examined as many as 15 witnesses in support of its case. The accused in his statement under section 313 Crimial P.C. denied the allegations levelled against him but did not lead any defence. The learned trial court vide its order dated 10.04.2003 convicted the accused appellant as indicated above. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court the accused appellant has preferred this appeal.