SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 599

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
V.R.K. Krupa Sagar, J.
Edala Nooka Naidu, & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Pp Hyd. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 958 of 2010
Decided On : 03-04-2023

Advocates appeared:
Dr Challa Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate

The court's interpretation and application of Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, as well as its findings on the compliance with the procedural requirements of Sections 50, 52, and 57 of the Act.

Headnote:

NDPS ACT - POSSESSION AND TRANSPORTATION OF GANJA - SECTIONS 8(C) AND 20(B)(II)(C) - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE - SECTIONS 50, 52, AND 57 - COMPLIANCE AND EFFECT ON TRIAL AND CONVICTION.

Fact of the Case:

Three appellants were convicted and sentenced for possessing and transporting ganja under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. The prosecution's case was that the appellants were found in possession of three bags containing a total of 76.700 kilograms of ganja during a vehicle check at a toll gate. The appellants denied the charges and claimed that the prosecution's evidence was fabricated.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court held that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was credible and consistent, and that the appellants had failed to offer any credible explanation for their possession of the ganja. The court also found that the investigating agency had complied with the procedural requirements of Sections 50, 52, and 57 of the NDPS Act.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the investigating agency had complied with the procedural requirements of Sections 50, 52, and 57 of the NDPS Act.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt based on the credible and consistent evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the failure of the appellants to offer any credible explanation for their possession of the ganja. 2. The court held that the investigating agency had complied with the procedural requirements of Sections 50, 52, and 57 of the NDPS Act, and that any infraction of these provisions did not ipso facto affect the trial or conviction.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of the trial court convicting and sentencing the appellants.

JUDGMENT

Dr. V.R.K. Krupa Sagar, J. - This Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 is filed by three appellants questioning the conviction and sentence in S.C.No.05 of 2010 in which they were tried by the learned I-Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur for a charge under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('for short NDPS Act,1985') and by a judgment dated 10.08.2010 they were found guilty. Each of them was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also pay a fine of Rupees One Lakh with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for two years.

2. Respondent in this appeal is the State.

3. Inspector of Police and his Sub-Inspector and other staff of Excise Station, Mangalgiri having been instructed by the Commissioner of Excise were engaged in vehicle checking at Khaja Toll-gate on 19.02.2010 and at about 6-15 PM they intercepted APSRTC bus bearing registration No.AP 28Z 4604 travelling from Vijayawada to Chennai. After notifying the driver of the bus and after issuing search proceedings to the driver of the bus, they searched the bus and they also searched the luggage box of the bus and they found three polythine bags. They suspected that they contain ganja as the bags were emanating such smell. They enquired with the two bus drivers available in the bus and found that A1 to A3 with tickets for seat Nos.15, 16 and 19 obtained luggage ticket also and those three bags belong to them. The officers questioned the accused who were there in their seats in the bus. Then in the presence of both the bus drivers and these accused the officers opened the bags and found in it ganja with flowers, leaves, stems and seeds. They got the bags weighed and found that one bag weighed Kg.18.700 grams, other bag weighed Kg.29.800 grams and third bag weighed Kg.28.200 grams.

Thus total weight of ganja of all the three bags put together was found to be Kg.76.700 grams. On questioning the accused, the officers found that they were bringing this ganja from Narsipatnam and they wanted to carry them to Koyambed. They seized the bus tickets and luggage tickets from the accused. From each of the bags they picked up the samples and pasted identity slips, over which they obtained the signatures of the accused as well as the panch witnesses/drivers of the bus. Having arrested the accused, along with the contraband they came back to the station. It is further stated that in evidence of arrest, seizure and sampling, they prepared Ex.P4 mediator report also. They got the bags photographed. The mediator report which they had prepared at the spot was registered as PR No.131/09-10 and F.I.R was issued and F.I.R was dispatched to the Court. The accused was forwarded to Court remand. The entire episode was informed by a report to the superior officers. The seized property was forwarded to the Court along with necessary forms. Directions of the learned Magistrate was obtained. The picked up samples, under a letter of advise, were forwarded to the analyst through Court. The analyst, by a report dated 06.03.2010, rendered the opinion that the samples that were examined were found to be ganja. The tickets that were seized from the accused were forwarded to APSRTC Depot which on verification certified that they are all genuine tickets. Seized ganja was subjected to inventory proceedings and photographs were also taken there and samples were also taken there. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was laid before First Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.

4. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, took cognizance for the offences and secured the presence of accused and furnished them with copies of documents. After hearing both sides and after considering the material on record, he charged A1 to A3 for the offence under Section 8(C) read with 20(b) (ii)(C) of N.D.P.S.Act, 1985. The charge was read over and explained to the accused and they denied

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top