HEERALAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Heera Lal has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 25-2-95 recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 122/94, whereby he has been convicted under S. 8/18 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short the Act, 1985) and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. one lack fine, in default 21/2 years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Shri Vijendra Kumar Vyas, S.H.O., Chittorgarh (P.W. 6) received secret information on 13-4-94 at 9.00 a.m. that a person will come from Ochhadi and will proceed on foot towards the fields and to Jodhpur with opium wrapped on his stomach. This information was reduced into writing in Roznamcha Aam Ex. P10 and a copy was forwarded to Superintendent of Police, Chittorgarh. S.H.O., Kotwali, Chittorgarh, thereafter proceeded on jeep with his party and two motbirs Ibrabim (P.W. 1) and Chunnilal (P.W. 2) to Nimbahera Road and took positions. The appellant came from the direction of Ochhadi at about 10.15 a.m., who was stopped by the raiding party and he was informed about the source information of opium in his possession. The S.H.O. also informed the appellant of his right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. The appellant gave his consent to be searched in the presence of motbirs by S.H.O. Vijendra Vyas. The prosecution case is that 700 gms. of contraband opium was recovered in a white polythene bag tied in his dhoti. Two samples weighing 30 gms. each were taken separately and sealed on the spot, seizure memo Ex. P2 and specimen seal memo Ex. P3 were also prepared on the spot, F.I.R. Ex. P17 was lodged and a case was registered against the appellant and investigation was conducted. After receiving the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory and completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant who was charged for the offence under S. 8/18 of the Act, 1985. After trial the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Chittorgarh convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and carefully perused the evidence on record.