SURAJ MAL ALIAS SURJYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, on behalf of the accused Suraj Mal @ Surjya S/o Shri Phool Chand, is directed against the judgment and order dated 19. 7. 2001 passed by the Special Judge, Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Cases, Jhalawar, in Sessions Case No. 29/2000, whereby he convicted the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 8/21 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `the Act') and sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's additional rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that PW-8 Pradeep Kumar, S. H. O. , Police Station, Bhawanimandi, received a secret information on 11th August 2000 at about 11. 00 P. M. on telephone from one informer that there is a house of Surajmal Meena at Mandvi Road, Tagar Mohallah, Bhawanimandi and he has smack in his possession and he will go to Kota in night by `janta Express' to dispose of the contraband. The said information was reduced by him in writing vide Exhibit P-13 and the information was sent to Superintendent of Police, Additional Superintendent of Police, Jhalawar and Circle Officer, Bhawanimandi, through wireless (Exhibit P-14 ). Thereafter he proceeded from the police station at 11. 20 P. M. with Yashwant Singh, S. I. , Dadam Chand, Ghanshyam and Ramesh Chand, Constable, with investigation kit. He reached at the residential house of Surajmal as per information of informer. Thereafter he directed the constable Dadam Chand vide written order (Exhibit P-9) dated 11. 8. 2000 at 11. 30 P. M. , to bring two local inhabitants as independent witnesses to attend and witness the search. However, PW-4 Dadam Chand gave his report at 11. 45 P. M. that no one is available because of night and all persons are sleeping in their houses. He knocked the doors of many houses but no one opened the door. Thereafter PW-8 Pradeep Kumar directed Yashwant Singh, S. I. , and Ramesh Chand, Constable, to witness the search. They knocked the door of house of Surajmal. One person came out of house, who, on asking, disclosed his name as Surajmal. He was told by them that they have information about possession of contraband by him in his house, therefore, they would like to search the house. The house was searched and from one trouser of the accused the contraband smack weighing 55 gram was recovered. Two samples of five gram each were taken and sealed in polythene bags. The recovery memo (Exhibit P-10) was prepared by PW-8 Pradeep Kumar, S. H. O. , Bhawanimandi, and accused was arrested. Thereafter the case was handed over for investigation to PW-2 Madan Lal, S. H. O. , Police Station Mishroli, District Jhalawar, who, after investigation of the case, submitted a charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 8/21 of the Act.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the accused-appellant further contended that the prosecution failed to prove the exclusive possession of the accused of the house and no documentary evidence showing his ownership of the house has been produced on the record. He also contended that the case property was not produced in the case so as to identify the same by the prosecution witnesses. He, therefore, contended that in view of the above submissions it is clear that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against accused-appellant beyond all reasonable doubts and he is entitled to get the benefit of doubt.