BHERU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal by accused appellant Bheru Lal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated March 16, 1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Ramganj-Mandi, District Kota by which he has convicted the accused appellant under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Pshychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as `the Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 2 & 1/2 years simple imprisonment.

(2.) SUCCINCTLY stated the contextual facts of the case are that on March 18, 1998 at 4. 00 PM, a Preventive Party under the leadership of PW. 4 Suresh Kishnani, Assistant Commissioner, Narcotics, Kota reached village, Bholu for the purpose of getting preliminary weight of the opium produced by the cultivators for the crop year 1997-98. During process, accused Bheru Lal produced opium weighing 4 kg cultivated and harvested under the licence bearing No. 32 issued in the name of his wife Nandu Bai. The Assistant Commissioner, Narcotics informed Bheru Lal that the weight of opium is less as compared to the land cultivated, which was 17 `aaries'. Accordingly, he directed the accused appellant that if he has concealed the opium, then he should also get the concealed opium weighed. Bheru Lal hesitatingly denied the possession of any opium with him. Found the answer of the appellant being suspicious, the Assistant Commissioner, Narcotics alongwith the members of the preventive party and witnesses, namely, PW. 2 Bheru Lal and PW. 1 Bhojraj, proceeded to the house of accused. Accused pointed out his house. PW. 3 P. C. Dhyani, Inspector, Narcotics Department informed the accused about his suspicion and by notice Ex. P1 made him aware of his legal right under Sec. 50 of the Act to get his house searched either in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Accused consented for the search of his house by the Inspector himself. During search of house, opium weighing 6 kgs was recovered vide memo Ex. P. 2. It is stated in the memo, Ex. P. 2 that since the object behind concealing opium out of the opium cultivated/produced was to make embezzlement and then to smuggle embezzled opium and, therefore, the opium was seized under the provisions of Section 8/18 for contravention of the provisions of Section 8/19 of the Act. P. C. Dyani prepared site plan, Ex. P. 3, seized the opium weighing 4 kgs. produced under the licence, vide memo Ex. P6 and also seized the paper of a register, Ex. P. 8 showing daily accounts of the opium collected, vide seizure memo Ex. P. 7. On completion of necessary formalities including arrest of the appellant, Shri P. C. Dyani submitted a First Information Report Ex. P. 14 to the Superintendent, Narcotics Bureau, Kota.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.