MOHAN BEHARI AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have challenged the order dated 1.9.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, Communal Riots, Jaipur wherein he has framed the charges against the accused petitioners for offences under Sec. 27-D, 27-A and 28-A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.

(2.) Mr. Ravi Yadav the learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the only evidence against the petitioners is the statement of co-accused Mangi Lal who has stated before the Drug Inspector that he had brought the drugs in question from Mohan Behari proprietor of M/s. Amar Medical Agencies, Film Colony, Jaipur. But Mangilal could not produce any cash memo to substantiate his claim that he had brought the medicines from M/s. Amar Medical Agencies, Jaipur.

(3.) Further more, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the trial Court has committed an error in treating this statement as a confession made by the co-accused. Learned trial Court has also committed an error in using this statement as a statement made under Sec. 30 of the Evidence Act. According to him the Drug Inspector has even raided the shop of M/s. Amar Medical Agencies, Jaipur but nothing incriminating had been discovered in the shop. Since, there is no other evidence but the statement of the co-accused, prima-facie no case is made out against the petitioner to warrant the framing of charges.