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

2018 Supreme(Bom) 2414

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.M. Badar, J.
Shakeel Habib Khan @ Papu Pager - Appellant
Versus
A.b. Kodnani & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 456 of 2010, 471 of 2010; Criminal Application No. 303 of 2017, 647 of 2013, 762 of 2014, 907 of 2016, 909 of 2015, 1065 of 2010
Decided On : 09-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Ayaz Khan, Adv., Dilip Mishra, Adv., Zehra Charania, Adv., Mandar Goswami, Adv., Tanaya Goswami, Adv., Sneha G Sanap, Adv., H.S. Venegaonkar, Adv., V.V. Gangurde, Adv.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 63 to 70 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 313 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Sections 8c, 29, 4, 20(b)(ii)(c) - Amount of fine - Fine leviable within six years, of during imprisonment. Death not to discharge property from liability – Appellants/accused nos.3 and 1 respectively, by these appeals, are challenging the judgment and order passed by learned Special Judge learned trial court by this impugned judgment and order is pleased to convict both these appellants/accused nos.3 and 1 respectively along with co-accuse for offences punishable well as for offence punishable – Intelligence Officer of Narcotics Control Bureau received secret information in matter regarding criminal conspiracy, interstate transport of narcotic drugs as well as possession by appellants/accused persons information was then submitted to Zonal Office and as directed by Zonal Director, search authorization in respect of house and vehicle came to be prepared – Surveillance was kept outside second after summoning panch witnesses PW10 and PW11 Rajesh four wheeler vehicle of brand Tavera bearing registration – Held, Honourable Apex Court as well as in view of both appellants/accused persons are first time offenders having no criminal antecedents and that they have already undergone entire substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment – Court considered opinion that default sentence of simple imprisonment in default of payment of fine harsh and excessive. In the law laid down by Honourable Apex Court in matter of Shahejadkhan same is brought default for payment of fine of imposed for the offence punishable as probability appellants/accused persons must have undergone this default sentence by now and therefore they shall be set at liberty unless they are required in any other offence appellants/accused persons have not completed modified period of sentence they shall be released after period indicated – Appeals are partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

A. M. Badar, J. - Criminal Appeal No.456 of 2010 is filed by appellant/accused no.3 Shakeel Habib Khan @ Papu Pager, whereas, Criminal Appeal No.471 of 2010 is filed by appellant/ accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa @ Kara. Both these appeals are being decided by common judgment as they are arising out of the same case.

2. Both the appellants/accused nos.3 and 1 respectively, by these appeals, are challenging the judgment and order dated 19th May 2010 passed by the learned Special Judge under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act) for Greater Mumbai, in NDPS Case No.215 of 2007. The learned trial court by this impugned judgment and order is pleased to convict both these appellants/accused nos.3 and 1 respectively along with co-accused (accused no.2) Nasirali Sher Ali Khan for offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) as well as for the offence punishable under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. Each of them is sentenced, on each count, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lakh, by each of them, on each count. In default of payment of fine, they are directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 year. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned trial court directed that the substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently.

3. Brief facts, leading to the prosecution of the appellants herein, along with the co-accused, are thus :

(a) On 3rd July 2007, PW1 Chandrakant Kedare, Intelligence Officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau received secret information in the matter regarding the criminal conspiracy, interstate transport of the narcotic drugs as well as possession thereof by the appellants/accused persons. The said information was then submitted to the Zonal Office and as directed by the Zonal Director, search authorization in respect of the house and vehicle came to be prepared. Surveillance was kept outside the second gate of Nutan Nagar Society, Bandra (West), Mumbai, after summoning panch witnesses PW10 Sandeep Joil and PW11 Rajesh Motwani. Ultimately, on 7th July 2007, at about 22.30 hours, four wheeler vehicle of brand Tavera bearing registration no.MH-43-N-4631 came in the premises of Nutan Nagar Society. Thereafter, according to the prosecution case, appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa came out of the society and approached the driver of that vehicle. The appellant/accused no.3 Shakeel Khan along with Papu Pager and co-accused Nasirali Khan were present in that four wheeler vehicle. The officers and the raiding team encircled them, showed their identity and after conducting statutory formalities, they recovered a zipper bag containing 20 kgs of hashish/charas from accused no.2 Nasirali Khan. The prosecution averred that the said narcotic drug was brought for selling it out to appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa. Subsequent thereto, officers of the Narcotics Control Bureau took appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa to his house, which is a flat bearing no.A13, situated in Nutan Nagar Society. Appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa then produced 11 carry bags containing hashish/charas by taking them out from the cupboard in the bedroom of that flat. The officers of the Narcotics Control Bureau took out two samples each weighing 24 gms from the contraband weighing 11 kgs found in zipper bag delivered by accused no.2 Nasirali Khan, so also two samples each weighing 24 gms from the contraband recovered from the flat of appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa. Samples were duly packed, sealed and labelled, so also, rest of the contraband. Search of the flat of appellant/accused no.1 Jayram Wadhwa was conducted. Personal search of accused persons was also conducted. The four wheeler vehicle was also searched during the course of the raid.

(b) During the course of investigation, PW4 Sanjay Sinha, Intelligence Officer of Narcotics Control Bureau, recorded statement of appellant/accused no.3 Shakeel Khan. PW5 Shrikant Fan

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top