IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V.Ravindra Babu, J.
Kalavakollu Jyothi - Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1217 of 2010
Decided On : 01-09-2023
NDPS Act - Possession of Ganja - Sec. 8(c) r/w Sec. 20(b)(ii)(B) - Sec. 50 - Sec. 46 of Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was found in possession of 3 Kgs. of Ganja on 12/6/2010. The trial court convicted her under Sec. 235(2) of Cr.P.C. and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of the charge and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved that the accused was found in possession of 3 Kgs. of Ganja on 12/6/2010? 2. Whether the prosecution proved the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt? 3. Whether the judgment is sustainable under law and facts and whether there are any grounds to interfere with the same?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that compliance of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act was not necessary as there was no personal search of the accused. The court also found that the accused's possession of Ganja was conscious and that she failed to account satisfactorily for the possession, leading to the presumption of guilt under Sec. 54 of the NDPS Act.
Final Decision: The court modified the rigorous imprisonment of 10 years to 4 years, reduced the fine from Rs.1,00,000.00 to Rs.25,000.00, and modified the default sentence to 6 months instead of two years. The rest of the judgment of the trial court in other aspects stands confirmed.
JUDGMENT
A.V.RAVINDRA BABU, J. - Challenging the judgment, dtd. 14/10/2010 in Sessions Case No.6 of 2010 (NDPS Act), on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, the unsuccessful accused filed the present Criminal Appeal.
2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3. The unsuccessful accused faced charge under Sec. 8(c) r/w Sec. 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 ("NDPS Act" for short) for alleged possession of 3 Kgs. of Ganja on 12/6/2010. The learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur on conclusion of the trial, found the accused guilty of the charge, convicted her under Sec. 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C." for short) and after questioning the accused about the quantum of sentence, sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two years. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful accused, filed the present Criminal Appeal.
4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as set out in the charge sheet pertaining to PR.No.20/2010-11 of Prohibition & Excise Station, Guntur, is as follows:
(i) The accused is resident of Venigandla, Pedakakani Mandal. The place of offence is located at the stones heap behind Milk Society, Venigandla, which is situated on the left side of the road that leads from Pedakakani to Venigandla.
(ii) On 12/6/2010 L.W.3-Shaik Syda, Prohibition and Excise Head Constable, Enforcement, Guntur, L.W.4-P.V. Seshaiah, Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspector, Enforcement, Guntur and L.W.5-N. Thirupathiah, Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Enforcement, Guntur, conducted patrolling duty to detect the Prohibition and Excise Offences. At about 1-00 p.m., they reached the place of offence i.e., the stones heap behind Milk Society, Venigandla, which is situated on the left side of the road that leads from Pedakakani to Venigandla and found the accused in possession of white colour plastic gunny bag at her feet. On seeing the excise officials, the accused tried to escape. The excise officials detained her with the help of staff. On questioning, the accused revealed that the gunny bag contains Ganja. Then, L.W.5 sent L.W.3 to bring mediators. After 20 minutes, L.W.3 brought L.W.1-D. Srinivasa Rao, V.R.O., Incharge of Venigandla and L.W.2-B. Suresh Kumar, Village Secretary, Venigandla, to act as mediators. The accused revealed her identity particulars on questioning about the commission of offence. The Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Enforcement, Guntur-L.W.5, has intimated to the accused about the procedure under Sec. 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, for which the accused expressed her unwillingness for search before a Gazetted Officer. Then, L.W.5 secured the weighing instrument through L.W.4. Then they opened the gunny bag and found leaves, flowers, barks, seeds along with dry Ganja. On weighing, it was found to be 3 Kgs. of Ganja. L.W.5-Prohibition and Excise Inspector, separately drawn 100 grams of Ganja into a separate packet, sealed and affixed identity slips to the samples in gunny bag. He seized the same and arrested the accused under the cover of mahazarnama. L.W.6-G. Dwarakanath, Prohibition and Excise Inspector, registered the mediators report vide PR.No.20 of 2010-11 under Sec. 8(c) r/w 20 (b)(ii) (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and forwarded the accused to the remand. The sample was sent to the chemical analysis and the analyst opined that it is of Ganja. Hence, the accused rendered herself liable for punishment under the above provision of law.
5. The learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, took cognizance of the case under the above provisions of law. After appearance of the accused and after compliance of Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C., the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, framed charge under Sec. 8(c) r/w 20(b(ii)(B) of N.D.P.S Act against the accused, explained to her
Krishna Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Punjab vs. Surinder Rani alias Chhidi
State of Haryana v. Jarnail Singh and others
The court emphasized that compliance of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act was not necessary as there was no personal search of the accused, and the accused's conscious possession of Ganja led to the presumptio....
Possession of narcotics requires no personal search compliance under Section 50 when found during public checks; evidence established conscious possession leads to conviction under the NDPS Act.
The court found the accused guilty of possession of Ganja based on consistent evidence from witnesses and dismissed the appeal.
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act does not vitiate the trial but renders the recovery suspect. The burden of proving a satisfactory explanation for possession lies with the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of culpable mental state and possession under Section 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act, and the court's reliance on the prosecution's evid....
Mandatory provisions under Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act must be followed strictly; non-compliance vitiates prosecution.
Search and seizure under NDPS Act must comply with Section 50 provisions, failing which accused are entitled to acquittal.
Non-compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards under Section 50 of the NDPS Act vitiates the prosecution case, entitling the accused to the benefit of doubt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.