KALUA ALIAS LAXMAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1.5.2000 pased by the Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases (Sessions Judge), Bharatpur, whereby he has convicted the accused appellant for offence under Sections 8/21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') and sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default thereof, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of this case are that P.W.8 Rameshwar Prasad received an information on 16.9.1995 at 12.15. P.M. from informer that one person is in search of selling smack in Chapper Mohala. Having received the information, he recorded the same as this 'Rojnamcha' and informed the officers superior on telephone and also sent the information in writing. Thereafter, Shri Rameshwar Prasad, SHO Kumher alongwith the witnesses and police party rushed to the disclosed place. The SHO stopped a person and asked his name and address, who disclosed his identity as Kalua s/o Shri Prabhu Dayal Vaishya r/o Januthar, Deeg (Bharatpur). The SHO informed the person about suspicion of his being in possession of smack and therefore, he informed the person his right to have his search conducted either in presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer vide Ex.P.13. Thereupon, that person gave his consent in writing on Ex.P.13 itself for his search by the SHO himself. On search, the SHO found a small packet (pudiya) in the left pocket of his shirt. On opening the packet, it was found to have contained smack. The accused Kalua was not having any licence. On getting the smack weighed, it was found to be 430 mgs. vide Ex.P.5. The SHO prepared the seizure memo Ex.P.3, arrested the accused vide arrest memo Ex.P.2.

(3.) THE learned trial Court after hearing arguments of counsel for the parties and on the basis of material on record, framed charge against the accused under Section 8/21 of the Act. The charge was read over to the accused, to which he denied and claimed to be tried.