2006 (3) Crimes 339
KERALA HIGH COURT (DB)
K. Padmanabhan Nair and V. Ram
Kumar, JJ.
Swarnaki — Appellant
versus
State of Kerala — Respondent
Cri. A. No. 523 of 2000
Decided on 24-8-2005
(ii)Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(B)(i) — Recovery of 25 grams of ganja from possession of appellant — Conviction by Trial Court — Appeal against conviction on plea of prejudice being caused to accused due to non-mentioning of his right to be searched from either of two categories of officers, Gazetted officer or Magistrate — Held real right of accused u/s. 50 is not an option between Gazetted Officer and Magistrate but an
option to have his body searched by empowered or Authorised Officer either
in presence of a Gazetted Officer or
Magistrate — Hence even if accused
was only given option of being searched in presence of magistrate and option of being searched in presence of Gazetted Officer was not put to him, there was sufficient compliance of Section 50.(Para 32)
(iii)Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 57 — Cr.P.C., 1973 — Section 58 — Recovery of 25 grams of ganja from possession of appellant — Conviction by Trial Court — Appeal against conviction on ground that since no report was sent to D.M., by officer conducting search, violation of provisions of Section 58 CrPC vitiated trial — Held provisions of Section 58 CrPC are not consistent with Section 57 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — No statutory duty is cast on officer effecting arrest or seizure to send any report to D.M. — Even if officer conducting search fails to send any report, same would not make search and seizure illegal or vitiate trial.(Para 40)
(iv)Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 55 — Recovery of 25 grams of ganja from possession of appellant — Conviction by Trial Court — Appeal against conviction on non-compliance of Section 55 — Plea that officer conducting search not affixed his personal seal on sample packet as well as packet containing balance ganja — Held, if any contraband article is found in person of accused, officer conducting search has to arrest him and produce such person with contraband article seized before officer in charge of nearest police station — Officer in charge of police station takes charge of articles seized and may allow any person accompanying such seized article to police station to affix his seal on articles or samples thereof — However Section 55 has no application when an authorised officer or empowered officer takes sample from contraband articles before same is delivered to police station.(Paras 35, 36)
(v)Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(i) — Quantum of sentence — Appellant convicted for being found in possessions of 25 grams of ganja — Appellant underwent imprisonment for more than five and a half months — Quantity seized was only 25 grams of ganja — Appellant convicted u/s. 20(b) prior to amendment of Section 20(b)(i) — Punishment imposed by Trial Court could not be set aside and appellant could not be convicted under provisions of amended section in view of Section 41 of Amending Act — However appellant being a widow aged 58 years and mother of three grown up daughters, substantive sentence already suffered, held sufficient to meet ends of justice.(Paras 42, 43)
Result : Appeal partly allowed.
ORDER
Padmanabhan Nair, J. — Factual Matrix
The accused in Sessions Case No. 35 of 1998 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Kollam is the appellant. The appellant was found guilty of an offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act" for short), convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of two and a half years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of six months.
2.At about 2.45 p.m. on 22-4-1997 the Sub Inspector of Police, Parippally and police party, which included P.W. 3, a woman Police Constable, were proceeding to arrest on Vilasini against whom a Non Bailable Warrant was issued by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Paravoor in S.T. No. 1431 of 1996. When the police party reached near a bunk shop situated on the eastern side of N.H. 47 on the puramboke land south of Parippally Junction, they saw the appellant standing near that shop. On seeing the police party, the accused became perplexed and fidgety. P.W. 5 became suspicious and questioned the appellant in the presence of P.W. 3 as to what exactly was the reason for her perplexity. She informed P.W. 5 that she was keeping packets of ganja for sale. On getting that information. P.W. 5 informed his immediate superior officer regarding the information he had received and informed the appellant whether she requires the presence of a Gazetted Officer for effecting the seizure of ganja from her possession. She informed P.W. 5 that she requires the presence of Gazetted Officer. P.W. 5 prepared a request and sent one of his constables to the Tehsildar’s office at Kollam, at about 4.00 p.m., Tahsildar came and in the presence of the Tehsildar, P.W. 5 questioned the appellant regarding her name and address and also about the ganja. She gave her name and address and handed over one packet of ganja which was kept at her waist. She also produced another 17 packets of ganja kept in the shop. The 18 packets were opened and examined. All the 18 packets contained dried ganja. The appellant
was arrested at 4.15 p.m. The ganja was got weighed with the help of one Ramchandran Achari. The weight of total ganja found in all the 18 packets was 25 grams, 5 grams of ganja was taken in the polythene cover as sample. The remaining 20 grams was put in another polythene cover. Both those polythene covers were wrapped with brown papers. P.W. 5 obtained the signatures of accused and attesters on the two packets. The Tehsildar had also affixed his signature to the sample packet as well as the packet containing the remaining quantity. Both packets were tied using twine. As the officer had no personal seal, he sealed the packets using a 10 Paise coin. The paper pieces in which the ganja was kept and a cover were also seized. The accused was arrested. The accused and the contraband articles were produced before Court. Subsequent investigation in the case was conducted by P.W. 8. When the investigation was over, P.W.6 filed the final report. When the accused appeared before the learned Sessions Judge, charge under Section 20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act was framed against her after hearing both sides. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant. She understood the same and pleaded not guilty. On the side of prosecution, P.Ws. 1 to 8 were examined. Exhibits P1 to P4 proved and marked. M. Os. 1 to 3 were identified.
3.P.W. 1 is an independent attestor to Exhibit P1 mahazar under which the contraband article was seized. He turned hostile and not supporting the prosecution case. P.W. 2 is the Tahsildar, in whose presence the contraband articles were seized. P.W. 3 is the woman constable who helped P.W. 5 in effecting the seizure. P.W. 4 is a police constable, who also accompanied P.W. 5. He was sent for securing the presence of P.W. 2 P.W. 5 is the detecting officer. He effected the seizure of the contraband article, arres
State of Punjab v Balbir Singh
State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh (1999) 6 SCC 172.(Para 19)
Kalayath Nassar v. State of Kerala
State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh
State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh
Bharatbhai Bhagwanjibhai v. State of Gujarat
Joseph Fernandez v. State of Goa
Beckodan Abdul Rahiman v. State of Kerala
Prabha Shankar Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Manohar Lal v. State of Rajasthan
Raghbir Singh v. State of Haryana
SupremeToday
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.