AJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Ajay Kumar was put on trial to face charges under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as well as under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code for having possession of brown sugar without any licence and stolen pair of silver payal and chain. The trial court having found the appellant guilty under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lac and in default of making payment to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 2 years.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that one Hareram Sharma, Sub -Inspector of Police was deputed at 'Durgabadi' along with the armed force to maintain law and order on the occasion of Durgapuja. On 3.10.2003 at about 7 p.m. while he was on duty at Durgabadi, he received secret information that some body has been selling brown sugar on the bank of the river. On getting such information, he along with other Police Officers came over there and saw two persons sitting near the bank of the river. They on getting sight of the police started moving downward towards the river. On being suspicion by the conduct of those persons, he asked the police force to keep watch on them and he informed about it to Jyoti Udai Tele, Dy. Superintendent of Police, (Headquarters). When Dy. S.P came, they apprehended those two persons and then he made search on the persons of those two accused persons in presence of Dy.S.P. and two independent witnesses, Rakesh Kumar, P.W. 6 and Anil Kumar, P W.5. On search being made, four packets of brown sugar kept in the pocket of the full pant and pair of Silver payal and one chain were recovered. On being asked, he disclosed his name as Ajay Kumar. Further case is that on being searched, four packets of brown sugar was recovered from the possession of Ashok Sharma. Those articles were seized before the Dy.S.P and the independent witnesses under seizure list (Ext.1). Subsequently, the said Hareram Sharma, Sub -Inspector of Police, P.W.2 submitted a written report (Ext.3) before the Officer -in -Charge of Town Police Station. On the basis of which, a case was Instituted and the matter was taken up for investigation by Shyama Prasad Singh, Investigating Officer, P.W.4. In course of investigation, seized article said to be brown sugar was sent for Chemical Examination. On being examined by Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, the incriminating article was found to be as brown sugar and a report to that effect was submitted which has been marked as Ext. 2.

(3.) IN this case the prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses, of them Jyoti Udai Tete, Dy.S.P has been examined as. P.W.1, P.W.2 Hareram Sharma is the informant, Chahdeshwar Singh, a member of the raiding party has been examined as P.W.3, Investigating Officer Shyama Prasad Singh is P.W.4 and other witnesses Anil Kumar, P.W.5, Rakesh Kumar P.W. 6, Jogmohan Ram, P.W. 7, Vijay Kumar Singh, P.W.8 have been declared hostile. After closure of the prosecution, the appellant was questioned about the incriminating circumstances appearing against them under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to which he denied.