STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. HUKAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.09.1989 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer, vide which the accused-respondent has been acquitted of the offence under Sec. 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 24.05.1988, an information was received by Shiv Chand, A.S.I. from Sumar Khan Constable that he has received information from informee that Hukam Singh would come in the bus, which is going from Ramsar to Chouhatan and he would be carrying opium and if the bus is searched, the same can be recovered. Upon this information, Shiv Chand, A.S.I. went to the road running from to Ramsar to Chouhatan and stopped bus No. RJN 5459 and on checking the bus, found Hukam Singh sitting in the bus. Under the thighs of Hukam Singh, a plastic canvass white colour bag was found, which on opening, was found to be containing opium. Shiv Chand, A.S.I., then brought the accused-respondent to the police station and in front of the S.H.O, recovery of the contraband was made. After investigation, challan was filed against the respondent. The learned court below charged the respondent for offence under Sec. 8/18 of the NDPS Act. The accused-respondent denied the charge, upon which ten witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. The statement of the accused-respondent was recorded under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C., and the learned court below, after hearing the arguments, acquitted the accused of offence under Sec. 18 of the NDPS Act. Aggrieved by which, the State has preferred this appeal.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has argued that the learned court below has found non-compliance of Sections 42, 43, 50 and 57 of the NDPS Act. The learned court below has also held that the A.S.I. was not competent to search, and therefore, has acquitted respondent. Learned Public Prosecutor has argued that bus was searched in presence of independent witnesses, and the samples were properly sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and the samples were found to be containing opium, having 3.68% and 2.75 opium and morphine respectively. Therefore the appeal deserves to be allowed.