JEEVRAJ RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated December 20, 1988, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant under Section 8/17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

(2.) THE incident, which led to the prosecution and trial of the appellant Jeevraj Ram under section 8/17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 took place on April 29, 1987, at about 11. 00 aim. when the accused-appellant was apprehended near the godown of 963rd by the police party headed by Nachhatra Singh, Station House Officer, Police Station, Bajju. THE case of the prosecution is that on April 29, 1987, Nachhatra Singh, S. H. O. , Police Station, Bajju, at about 10. 00 a. m. received an information from one 'mukhbir' and this information he entered in the 'roznamcha' vide Ex. P-ll and went in a jeep alongwith Shashi Raj, Bhanwar Singh, Munshi Ram, Moti Ram , Patt Ram, Gopi Ram and the driver Gopi Ram and reached near 961-R. D. , from where they took Mohan Ram motbir-witness and proceeded towards 963-RD. and when they reached near the godown of R. C. P. near 963 -R. D. , they saw the accused-appellant hiding himself. On seeing this, they stopped the jeep. THE accused ran away. THEy followed the accused and caught-hold of him. On enquiry, the person arrested disclosed his name as Jeevraj Ram. At that time, the accused was carrying a bag and on search it was found that this bag contained five separate polythene bags containing opium. THE polythe-ne bags containing opium were weighed and the weight of all these five polythene bags came to 5. 130 kgs. A sample from all these five polythene bags was taken weighing 60 grams and the sample as well as the other opium were sealed and after doing all these formalities and preparing the memos etc. , the police party came to Police Station, Bajju. On F. S. L. Examination, the article was found as opium and, therefore, the challan against the accused under section 8/ 17 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') was submitted. THE accused was tried by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Bikaner. THE Police in support of its case, produced eight witnesses and the accused, in support of his case, examined two witnesses. THE learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, after trial convicted the accused under section 8/17 of the Act and sentenced the accused-appellant to undergo fifteen years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment. It is against this judgment, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner, convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant that the accused has preferred this appeal.

(3.) IN this view of the matter, I am therefore, reluctant to up-hold the prosecution case, which is solely based on the recovery made as a result of the search not witnessed by any independent or respectable person, as it was not impracticable to procure the independent witnesses. The investigating officer did not try to call the independent witnesses and rest contended with the evidence of the police personnels. He even did not care to comply with the provisions of section 50 of the Act.