RAM CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal by accused appellants arises out of the judgment dated 7.2.97 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baran, by which, he has convicted the accused appellants under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrophic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act') and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. one lac, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 8.9.95 P.W.2 Prem Shanker Meena, SHO Police Station, Kotwali, Baran having received information rushed to the place pointed out by the informant and apprehended the accused appellant. P.W.3 Satyendra Singh, Dy.S.P. also reached there. On being suspected that accused appellant was in possession of contraband, the SHO informed him of his right to have his search conducted either in presence of Shri Satyendra Singh, Dy.S.P. who was a Gazetted Officer and happened to be present there or in the presence of any Magistrate. The accused appellant consented for his search to be conducted in the presence of the Dy.S.P. On being searched, 570 grams of opium was recovered from his possession in the presence of P. W. 5 Ramesh Chand and P.W.6 Rajendra Kumar. Out of the recovered opium, a sample weighing 30 grams was taken and was sealed. The remaining opium was also sealed. The accused was accordingly arrested vide arrest memo Ex.P.5 and memo of recovery was prepared. The SHO, thereafter, registered a case vide FIR Ex.P.4 and deposited the recovered opium in the 'Malkhana'. During investigation, the police recorded the statement of witnesses and sent the sample to the Forensic Science Laboratory. On chemical examination, the sample contained in the packet marked 'B' gave positive tests for the Chief Constituents of coagulated juice of opium poppy having 5.43% morphine.

(3.) After completion of all these formalities, the accused was charge sheeted under Section 8/18 of the Act. The Trial Judge framed charge against the appellant u/s.8/18 of the Act, to which the appellant denied and claimed trial.