BADRI NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code" hereinafter) is directed against the judgment and order dated 9/12/2002 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Jodhpur (for short, "the trial Court" hereinafter) in Sessions Case No. 63/2001, whereby the trial Court convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, "the NDPS Act" hereinafter) and sentenced him to undergo ten days rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment. By the very judgment and order, co-accused Om Prakash was also convicted for the offence under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act and sentenced. Aggrieved by the judgment and order impugned, the appellant has filed the instant appeal. Co-accused Om Prakash has not challenged his conviction and the sentence awarded to him.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case, to the extent they are relevant arid necessary for the decision of this appeal, are that on 6/7/2001, at 7:45 AM, PW 9 Rupinder Singh, IPS, the then Station House Officer, Police Station, Soorsagar, Jodhpur, received a secret information Exhibit P/19 from PW 3 Dharma Ram, ASI, Intelligence Department, that near Ram Lodge, Bombay Motors Circle, Jodhpur, the appellant and co-accused Om Prakash are trading in Charas in a betel Cabin. The secret information was reduced to writing vide Exhibit P/19 and sent to the higher officer i.e., the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur through Constable Lalit Kumar. The Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur authorised PW 9 Rupinder Singh to carry out search, seizure and arrest vide Exhibit P/1. PW 11 Madan Singh was sent for calling two independent Motbirs, who after taking two independent Motbirs, viz. Sattar Mohammed and Vishan Lal, reached to Police Outpost, Masuriya at 10:00 AM. The two Motbirs gave their consent in writing to become Motbirs. Thereafter the police reached at the place as per the secret information at 11:30 AM. The appellant and co-accused Om Prakash were apprised of the secret information. A notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served on them. On search, the appellant was found in possession of 80 grams of contraband Charas and co-accused Om Prakash was found in possession of 100 grams of contraband Charas. The Charas was seized from the appellant and co-accused Om Prakash. Two samples of 30 grams each were taken from the Charas seized from the appellant and co-accused respectively. They were apprised of the ground of their arrest and arrested. On the very day, at 2:50 PM, while the appellant was in police custody, he voluntarily gave an information under Section 27 of the Evidence Act vide Exhibit P/8 that he has concealed some more Charas at his residence in a lidded tin having lock, the key of which is with him. In pursuance of the said information, contraband Charas weighing 1950 grams was also recovered from the appellant. After usual investigation, the police filed Challan against the appellant and co-accused for the offence under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution adduced evidence by producing as many as 12 witnesses and the documents Exhibit P/l to Exhibit P/29 as also Exhibit D/1 and Exhibit D/2. The appellant made statement under Section 313 of the Code and denied the allegation. Vide judgment and order impugned, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant, as noticed above. Hence this appeal.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Perused the impugned judgment and order as also the record of the trial Court.