Back
A.S.ANAND, K.T.THOMAS, S.RAJENDRA BABU
Abdul Rashid Ibrahim Mansuri – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
The legal principle regarding the presumption of culpable mental state under the relevant statute establishes that the court shall presume the existence of such a mental state in prosecutions requiring proof of intent, knowledge, motive, or belief. However, the burden of discharging this presumption lies with the accused. The accused can fulfill this burden through multiple methods, including relying on the evidence presented by the prosecution, cross-examining witnesses to dispel doubts, or adducing additional evidence when called upon to do so.
Importantly, the burden of proof can be considered discharged even without the accused presenting any evidence of their own if the circumstances emerging from the prosecution's evidence provide reasonable assurance to the court that the accused could not have had the requisite knowledge or intention. This means that the court's assessment of the evidence can lead to a conclusion that the accused lacked the mental culpability necessary for conviction, based on the surrounding circumstances and the nature of the evidence presented.
Judgment
Thomas, J.—Appellant was an auto-rickshaw driver. On the evening of 12.1.1988 an auto-rickshaw was intercepted by a posse of police personnel while it was proceeding to Shahpur (Gujarat). Four gunny bags were found stacked in the vehicle. They contained ‘Charas’ (Cannabis hemp). Appellant was arrested and prosecuted for offences under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (1985) (for short ‘the Act’) besides Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act.
2. The trial Court acquitted the appellant, but on appeal by the State of Gujarat a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat set aside the order of acquittal and convicted him of the offences under the above sections. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rupees one lakh for the first count while no separate sentence was imposed for the second count.
3. Facts are not seriously disputed by the appellant. More details about the facts are the following :
PW-2 Premsingh M. Vishen, Inspector of Police at Dariapur Police Station, got information on 12.1.1988 that one Iqbal Syed Husen was trying to transport Charas upto Shahpur in an auto-rickshaw bearing N
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
