STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. UNKAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State is aggrieved by the judgment dt. 04.11.2008 passed by the Special Judge, (NDPS Cases) cum District & Sessions Judge, Rajsamand, whereby the learned Judge has acquitted the accused -respondent Nos. 1 to 9 for offences under Secs. 8/15, 8/29 and 8/25 of the NDPS Act, ('the Act', for short). Briefly the facts of the case are that on 02.04.2007, the SHO, Police Station Diwar, Mr. Idan Singh (P.W. 16), received an information at 12:15 PM, whereby he was informed that a jeep, bearing registration No. RJ 21 GA 0224, is loaded with doda post. The said jeep is being driven by four or five person coming from the side of Gomti. The said information was sent to the higher officer in compliance with the requirement of Section 42(2) of the Act. The said information was sent through constable, Prabhudayal. Subsequently, the SHO had reached Satpaliya Choraha along with Chun Singh (P.W. 3) and Mohan Singh (P.W. 4), as independent recovery witnesses. Around 2:10 PM, the police party saw a jeep coming from the side of Gomti. The moment the persons travelling in the jeep saw the police party, they turned the jeep around. Out of the six persons sitting in the jeep, five persons managed to escape. But one of the persons was apprehended by the police. He revealed his name as Onkar Singh. When he was asked about the other persons, he informed the police that they are Bhoja @ Bhajanlal, Rahul, Ramvilas, Mahendra Singh. He further informed that the driver of the jeep, who belongs to Vishnoi community, was a resident of village Ranesar. After giving the statutory option, Onkar Singh and the jeep were searched. In the jeep, the police party found two plastic bags along with five gunny bags. All the bags contained doda post powder. From the papers discovered in the jeep, it was revealed that the owner of the jeep was one Bhagirath. The plastic bags and the gunny bags were marked as 'A' to 'G'. A total of 375 Kgs., of doda post powder was discovered. During the course of the investigation, the accused -respondents were arrested. After completion of the investigation, charge -sheets were filed against, Onkar Singh, Bhoja @ Bhajan Lal, Rahul @ Banshi Lal for offences under Secs. 8/15 and 8/29 of the Act; against Shiv Lal @ Andaram, a charge -sheet was filed for offences under Secs. 8/15, 8/29 and 8/25 of the Act; against Chagan Lal Gurjar, Shantilal Jat, Bapulal, Tulsiram and Shivlal, the charge -sheet was filed for offence under Sec. 8/29 of the Act. Thus, in total the police filed charge -sheets against nine accused persons. It also filed a charge -sheet against the driver of the jeep. Against Mahendra Vishnoi, Ramvilas Vishnoi and Hetram, the police kept investigation pending under Sec. 173(8) Cr. P.C.

(2.) IN order to buttress its case, the prosecution examined thirty -one witnesses and submitted eighty -one documents. However, the defence neither examined any witness, nor submitted any document. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, vide judgment dt. 04.11.2008, the learned Judge acquitted all the accused respondents. Hence, this criminal leave to appeal before this Court.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. Farzand Ali, the learned counsel for the accused -respondents, has vehemently contended that the learned Judge has given cogent reasons for acquitting the accused -respondents for the offences under the NDPS Act: firstly, although the prosecution claimed that only seven bags i.e., two plastic bags and five gunny bags, were recovered from the jeep, but the prosecution had submitted fourteen bags before the learned trial Court. Therefore, it was unclear as to how the seven bags were converted into fourteen bags. Moreover, the fourteen bags did not contain any seal chit. Further, the learned Judge has noticed the fact that the mandatory provisions of Section 42(1) of the Act were not even followed. Furthermore, the learned Judge has noticed the fact that although the police had raided the houses of Bhoja @ Bhajanlal, Shivlal @ Andaram, Rahul @ Banshilal, Chaganlal Gurjar, Shantilal Jat, Bapulal Jat, Tulsiram Anjana and Shivlal Payak, yet no incriminating evidence was gathered from their houses. Lastly, nothing was recovered from any of the accused -respondents.