IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
H.H. Kantharia M.G. Chaudhari, JJ.
Rajkumar Ramchandra Sahu and others .... Appellants.
Versus
State of Maharashtra.... Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 757 of 1990, decided on 21-8-1991.
Advocates appeared :
H.H. Ponda with K.Z. Nagamia, for the appellants.
S.B. Patil, A.P.P., for State.
Although the appellants desired and requested Sub-Inspector that they should be searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, the request was not acceded to on a spacious ground that Sub-Inspector din not have enough time. In not taking the appellants to the nearest Gazetted Officer or the nearest Magistrate for being searched, grave prejudice can be said to have been caused to the defence in this case inasmuch as the appellants were perhaps sure that they din not possess any contraband goods and would not like to take a risk of being searched by Police Officers and would be more safe and secured if searched in the presence of either a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The least, therefore, that sub-Inspector should have done in this case was to take the appellants before the nearest Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and search the appellants in the presence of such a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate which would have assured fair investigation when it was a mandate of the law under Section 50 of the NDPS Act that if the persons sought to be searched require the Investigation Officer to take him before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate there was no reason why Investigating Officer here should not have acceded to such a request to the appellants which would have meant full implementation of the provisions of law. This procedural defect during the Course of investigation certainly can be said to have caused prejudice to the defence and that being so, the appellants are entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Section 8 (c) read with Section 22- Conviction-Breach of procedure Effect.
Mere irregularity in following the procedural law or some infirmity therein would not by itself vitiate the trial and consequent conviction recorded against accused persons unless it is shown by the defence that in not following the procedural law prejudice was caused to the defence.
Section 8 (c) read with Section 22-Conviction-Validity-Panch witnesses-Both professionals with criminal background having no fixed place of residence-Held-Evidence suffering for want of credibility - Accused entitled to benefit of doubt and consequent acquittal.
2. The relevant facts giving rise to the appeal are as under.
On September 2, 1989 at about 7.00 a.m. Dattaram Narayan Ketkat (P.W. 1), a head constable attached to Nagpada Police Station, received information that a dealing in narcotic drugs would take place at Room No. 6, Building No. 40 at the 6th lane of Kamathipura, M.R. Road, Bombay. Head Constable Ketkar, therefore, contacted Sub-Inspector Dagdu Patil (P.W. 5) and accordingly the raiding party went to a police chowki situated at the corner of the 5th lane of Kamathipura. There, the informant requested Sub-Inspector Patil to wait for some time and in the meanwhile he would find out the exact time of the dealing. The informant came back at about 9.45 a.m. and told Sub-Inspector Patil that the deal was to take place at 10.00 a.m. Immediately, two panch witnesses viz., Mohammed Amin Mohammed Hussain Shaikh (P.W. 2) and Babu Abdul Khan (P.W. 3) were called and the raiding party along with the panch witnesses as also the informant went to the 6th lane of Kamathipura where the informant pointed out building No. 40 and Room No. 6 therein on the first floor and went away. The police party accompanied by the panch witnesses went to the first floor and stood in front of Room No. 6 of which the door was slightly open. The raiding party knocked at the door and entered the room and noticed that the appellants were about to leave the room. Appellant No. 1 was having a grey bag hanging on his shoulders and appellant No. 2 was found holding a Khaki paper package in his left hand. Both the appellants got frightened on seeking the police party and on being questioned gave evasive replies. Thereafter, their search was taken which revealed that in the grey cloth bag which was with appellant No. 1 there was one white polythene bag and one red cloth bag. In the polythene bag there was one white cloth bag which when opended was found containing one more polytene bag inside which there was a Khaki paper bag. In the said Khaki paper bag was found some brown power which was smelt and and it was ascertained that the same was brown sugar. In the red bag there was also a cash amount of Rs. 13,725/- in different denominations. Likewise, in the Khaki paper package which was found the appellant No. 2 there was a polythene bag in which again there was brown powder which was smelt and ascertained to be brown sugar. Weighing apparatus were then procured and what was found with the appellants was weighed. Thus, what was found from appellant No. 1 was 750 grams of brown sugar and what was found with appellant No. 2 was 250 grams of brown sugar. Thereafter, samples of 10 grams from each packet were taken and put in two small polythene packets which was closed with staple pins and put separately in brown paper sheets and sealed. They were marked as A, A-1 and B, B-1 and were labelled with the signatures of the panch witnesses and sealed. The main packets now containing 740 grams and 240 grams of brown sugar were also taken charge under a panchanama. Both the appellants were then arrested and brought to Police Station where Sub-Inspector Patil recorded the statement of Ketkar which was treated as First Information Report upon which a crime was registered. Further investigation was carried out during which a report of the Chemical Analyser was obtained which revealed that what was found from the appellants was brown sugar. On completion of the investigation, the
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.