MOHD ADILUJ JAMAN @ SARPHOOL AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This jail appeal has been filed by the appellants against the judgment dated 13.9.2006 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Ajmer in Criminal Case No.2/2005, whereby the present appellants have been convicted for the offence under section 8/21 of NDPS Act and sentenced as under:

(2.) The short facts of the case are that on 16.9.2004, a secret information has been received by the Station House Officer, Madandan Singh, Police Station, Dargah, Ajmer. After recording the concerned information and with the aid of the independent witnesses, Leelaram and Kallu, they went near Ali Mention Guest House, two persons were going towards the Diggi Bazar. They have been questioned. Their names have been disclosed as Mohammad Adiluj Jaman @ Sarphool and Mohammad Anisur Rehman. After compliance of provisions of section 50 of the Act, search has been conducted and from Mohammad Adilud Jaman, four packets of smack has been recovered from the attachee containing 1.40 kg, 1.38 kg, 1.42 kg and 1.36 kg respectively. From other accused person Mohammad Anisur Rehman, five packets were recovered from the attachee containing.1.40 kg, 1.42 kg, 1.30 kg, 1.42 kg and 824 grams respectively. Samples were drawn as per the prescribed procedure. FIR has been lodged and after usual investigation, chargesheet has been filed against the present appellants. The report of the FSL gives positive test for the present of diacetylmorphine. The present appellants have been charged under section 8/21 of NDPS Act. Ten witnesses have been produced in support of the prosecution evidence along with documentary evidence from Ex.P-1 to 41. Accused appellants have been examined under section 313 Cr.P.C, no defence witness has been led. After hearing the appellants and the prosecution, present appellants have been convicted and sentenced as stated above. Hence this appeal:

(3.) Heard learned Amicus Curiae for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the judgment as well as the record of the case.