DANA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374(2) Cr.RC. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.3.2003 passed by Special Judge NDPS Cases, Jodhpur (for short "the trial court" hereinafter) in Sessions Case No. 29/2000 whereby the trial court convicted appellant Dana Ram for the offence under Sec. 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act' hereinafter) and sentenced him to undergo 10 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that PW-4 Dy. S.R Anil Kumar received a secret information vide Ex.P/9 on 15.3.2000 at 7.00 AM at Chauhtan to the effect that contraband heroin has been smuggled from Pakistan and it is hidden somewhere which will be taken out by appellant Danaram. On this information PW-2 Dy.S.R Anil Kumar, PW-1 ASI Motiram, PW-2 Circle Inspector Awardan, PW-5 Constable Swaroop Singh and PW-9 Constable Hakam Singh went to BSF post, Bhanda where they met Jiyalal and one Jai Singh, both BSF personnel, who were patrolling the border near fencing. It is alleged that a person started running from the side of Khejri tree having a plastic bag in hand. He was caught hold. On being asked, he disclosed his name as Danaram, present appellant. The bag was searched and on search it was found containing 17 small bags. He was served with a notice under Sec. 50 of the Act vide Ex.P/6. On having (been) served with the notice under Sec. 50 of the Act, the appellant gave consent vide Ex.P/2. He was searched and a seizure memo Ex.P/4 was prepared.

(3.) After usual investigation the police filed challan against the appellant for the offence under Sec. 8/21 of the Act. The prosecution adduced the evidence by producing as many as 9 witnesses and documents Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/18. The appellant made statement under Sec. 313 Cr.RC. and denied the allegation. The trial court, at the conclusion of the trial and appreciation of evidence, found the appellant guilty for the offence under Sec. 8/21 of the Act and accordingly he was convicted and sentenced as noticed above.