IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI, JJ.
Arun Kumar Jatav – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.147 of 2022
Decided on : 10-11-2023
NDPS Act - Conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) - Section 52A(2), (3) and (4) discussed
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for possession of Ganja under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. The prosecution's case was based on the seizure of Ganja from the appellant's car and subsequent procedures followed by the investigating officer.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the procedures prescribed under Section 52A(2), (3) and (4) of the NDPS Act were not followed during the seizure and sampling of the contraband. The court also noted contradictions and lack of credibility in the prosecution's evidence.
Issues: The main issue was the compliance with the procedural requirements of the NDPS Act, specifically Section 52A(2), (3) and (4), in the seizure and sampling of the contraband.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the failure to follow the prescribed procedures for seizure and sampling as mandated by Section 52A(2), (3) and (4) of the NDPS Act rendered the evidence invalid as primary evidence in the trial, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
Final Decision: The appellant's conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed the appellant to file a personal bond and two sureties in compliance with Section 437-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment dated 27.12.2021 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Raipur in Special Case No.10/2018 by which the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as 'NDPS Act') and sentenced him undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on a secret information received from the informant on 18.11.2017 to Assistant Sub Inspector Police Station, Arang that one Scoda Car registration No.HR 26 AQ 9765 bearing red colour upon the number plate of it written ‘MAHA SACHIV’ in which two unknown persons carrying Ganja inside the dickey and beneath the seats, are coming from Saraipali towards Arang and within one hour they will reach Arang. The said police official recorded the secret information panchnama vide Ex.P-16 and thereafter served notice under Section 160 CrPC to the witnesses Naval Kishor and Keshav Vaishnav vide Ex.P-22. Further, as per the case of the prosecution, the said police official conducted raid party and with the Government vehicle reached at Tiraha Crossing in front of Sri Ram Auto, Arang N.H. 53 and stopped one Scoda Car No.HR 26 AQ 9765 coming from Mahasamund, the driver of the said car after removing the key ran away and one person who was sitting back seat of the said car i.e. present appellant was informed and served a secret information vide Ex.P-2. Thereafter, after obtaining consent vide consent panchnama Ex.P-3, got searched by the said official with staff and witness vide search memo Ex.P-4. The investigating officer searched the Scoda Car and recovered 42 big and small wrapped polythene packet containing the substance Ganja vide recovery panchnama Ex.P-5 and thereafter prepared spot identification of the substance of Ganja vide identification panchnama Ex.P-6. Notice (Ex.P-7) was sent to weigher Mohd. Ismail alias Pappu to come on the spot with scales for weighing the Ganja found in the car, upon which weigher Mohd. Ismal came on the spot with a big electronic scale and physical verification of the scales was done vide Ex.P-8. Thereafter, weighing proceeding of Ganja recovered from the accused was done. Total wight of the Ganja was found to be 182 kg. Weighing panchnama (Ex.P-10) was prepared and the said substance Ganja and the vehicle used for transporting Ganja was seized from accused Arun Kumar Jatav as per property seizure memo Ex.P-11. Two packets each contains 50-50 grams Ganja total 8 packets samples were taken out, separated and sealed. Site plan of the incident site was prepared vide Ex.P-15 in front of the witnesses.
3. Further, as per the prosecution story, the investigating officer recorded the memorandum statement of accused Arun Kumar Jatav vide Ex.P-13 on the spot in front of the witnesses, accused Arun Kumar Jatav disclosed about bringing Ganja with co-accused Neeraj Chauhan from Odisha. The documents i.e. Driving License, PAN Card, Aadhar Card and Votor ID Car of co-accused Neeraj Chauhan were seized from accused Arun Kumar Jatav as per seizure memo (Ex.P-12) and thereafter accused Arun Kumar Jatav was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.P-14 and thereafter Tehreer (Ex.P-23) reducing in writing on the spot itself. After returning to the police station along with the seized Ganja, accused, staff, witnesses from the spot, accused Arun Kumar Jatav was detained in the lockup and the Ganja, vehicle and documents of accused Neeraj Chauhan obtained during the search were given to Head Constable No.1147 and the first information report was registered vide Ex.P-24 and thereafter intimated their senior official CSP Mana on 19.11.2017 vide Ex.P-21 and thereafter the seized Ganja was sent to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur. Aft
Union of India v. Mohanlal and another reported in (2016) 3 SCC 379
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of strict compliance with the procedural provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A(2), (3) and (4), for seizure and s....
Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and lack of corroboration from witnesses can vitiate the conviction.
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of trial.
Strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly regarding the procedure for seizure, sampling, and safe custody of seized articles, is crucial. Non-compliance with these....
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
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.