DEEP CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against the judgement dated 16-7-94 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases cum Addl. Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence under S. 8/20 (b) (i) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, in short, 'the Act' and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years a fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) In nutshell, the relevant facts are that on 11-1-1992 at 1.45 p.m. PW 6 Balwant Rai SHO, PS, Sujangarh, while he was on patrolling duty in Naya Bazar, Sujangarh, received a source information to the effect that appellant Deep Chand Bajaj had 'Ganja' in his possession, which he wanted to sell and that he had just then gone towards the Railway Station through the southern street having a plastic bag. The said S.H.O. recorded the source information vide memo Ex. P. 9. Two motbirs namely PW 1 Ram Singh and PW 2 Hari Ram were intimated about the source information vide memo Ex. P. 1 and Ex. P. 5 respectively and their signatures were procured thereon. Balwant Rai along with the said motbir stand members of the police party consisting of PW 2 Hari Ram, Head Constable, PW 4 Raghunath Singh A.S.I. and other police constables besides the driver of the police jeep on the same day at about 2 PM reached near the street for Rampuria Cottage Sujangarh, where they noticed appellant Deep Chand carrying a plastic 'Katta', who on seeing the police vehicle, started running. Thereupon he was chased and surrounded by the police party and apprehended. Balwant Rai intimated the appellant vide memo Ex. P. 10 whether he wanted his search to be taken in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer or he consented to give his search to him. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant gave his consent to the said S.H.O. to take his search and thereupon a plastic bag was recovered from his possession, which contained 'Ganja' and for which he did not possess any licence. The said 'Ganja' was weighed in presence of the motbirs and the police party. The contraband weighed 2 kg 500 gms. and therefrom a representative sample weighing 50 gms. was taken and separately sealed in a cloth packet and the remaining contraband material weighing 2.450 kg was sealed in the said 'Katta' and was marked B. The seizure memo Ex. P.3 was prepared on the spot and the appellant was arrested. Balwant Rai brought the appellant to the Police Station where FIR Ex. P. 11 was drawn and a case under S. 8/20 of the Act was registered. The sealed packet of the sample marked 'A' and contraband packet were kept in the safe custody of Malkhana of the Police Station. On 6-2-92, the sealed packet of the sample was handed-over to PW 5 Sher Singh, Constable, who took the same along with the letter of the S.H.O. Ex. P.13 to the S.P., Churu, who in turn, issued a forwarding letter to the State F.S.L. and the same was deposited in the State F.S.L. vide receipt Ex. P.8 dt. 7-2-92. The Assistant Director, State F.S.L., Rajasthan, Jaipur, on chemical and microscopic examination vide report dated 25-4-92 Ex. P.12 opined that the said sample contained in packet marked 'A' was found to be of 'Ganja'. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted a challan against the appellant on 27-6-92 in the court of learned M.J.M., Sujangarh, who took cognizance against the appellants and committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Churu, from where it was transferred to the court of learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases, Ratangarh, who framed the charge against the appellant for the offence under S. 8/20 of the Act. The appellant denied the indictment and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. The appellant in his, plea recorded u/s. 313, Cr. PC denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence. However he did not adduce any evidence in his defence. The learned Special Judge after trial convicted the appellant for the offence under S. 8/20(b) of the Act and sentenced him in the manner stated above. Hence this appeal.

(3.) I have heard Shri G. L. Khatri learned counsel for the appellant and Shri C.R. Jakhar learned Public Prosecutor at length and carefully perused the record of the learned lower court in extenso.