LAWS(TLNG)-2019-12-433

K. NAGAIAH SWAMY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

Decided On December 09, 2019
K. Nagaiah Swamy Appellant
V/S
STATE OF A.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned I-Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, in N.D.P.S. S.C.No.19 of 2011 dated 23.05.2011, whereby the appellant/accused was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of four months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 07.10.2010 at about 11.30 A.M. P.Ws.3, 4 and 5/Prohibition and Excise officials along with P.Ws.1 and 2/Panch witnesses raided the house of the appellant/accused after serving a search memo and a notice under Section 50 (1) of the N.D.P.S. Act and found 6.500 K.Gs. of dry Ganja in a plastic cover and also 30 paper packets each containing about 20 grams of Ganja concealed with bed sheets in the north-eastern corner of the second room of the house and that the accused confessed that he purchased the same from an unknown person of Munipally village at the rate of Rs.500/- per K.G. and was selling the same to the needy persons. Thereafter, a case in COR No.253 of 2010-2011 was registered against the accused for the offence under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the accused under the aforesaid offences.

(3.) The plea of the accused is one of total denial. The prosecution, in order to prove its case against the accused, examined P.Ws.1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to P21 and M.Os.1 and 2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on appraisal of entire evidence, both oral and documentary, held that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused for the offence under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) of N.D.P.S. Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated supra. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the appellant/accused preferred the present appeal.