HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ., Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Ambika Vishwakarma S/o Shivprasad Vishawkarma - Appellant
Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
CRA No. 260 of 2021
Decided On : 16-01-2025
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21(c) - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Conviction for possession of narcotic syrup - Appellants convicted and sentenced to 12 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,10,000/- each - Prosecution established possession of commercial quantity of narcotics - Compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act upheld - Sentence modified to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. (Paras 2, 24, 28)
(B) Burden of Proof - Prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt - Evidence of police officers can be sufficient if credible - Independent witnesses turning hostile does not negate prosecution's case if police evidence is reliable. (Paras 13, 14)
(C) Sentencing - Court must provide reasons for imposing a sentence higher than the minimum - Factors under Section 32B of NDPS Act considered for sentencing. (Paras 25, 28)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were arrested on 20.09.2018 with a total of 236 bottles of narcotic syrup containing Codeine Phosphate. The trial court convicted them based on the evidence of the investigating officer and the circumstances of the case. (Paras 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the quantity of narcotics was classified as commercial. The sentence was modified to 10 years. (Paras 24, 28)
Issues: The main issues included the classification of the quantity of narcotics and compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act. (Paras 8, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the entire weight of the mixture, including neutral substances, must be considered for determining commercial quantity, and the prosecution's evidence was sufficient despite hostile witnesses. (Paras 22, 24)
Result: Appeals partly allowed; sentence reduced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment.
Judgment :
(Ramesh Sinha, C.J.)
1. Since the aforesaid two criminal appeals arise out of same judgment of conviction and order of sentence, they were clubbed & heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Appellant – Ambika Vishwakarma has preferred Criminal Appeal No.260/2021 and Appellant – Narayan Das has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 349/2021 under Section 374(2) of the CrPC questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Surguja, Ambikapur, District – Surguja in Special Criminal (NDPS) Case No.04/2019, by which they have been convicted for offence under Section 21 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as 'NDPS Act') and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and fine of Rs.1,10,000/- (each), in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years.
3. The brief case of the prosecution is that on 20.09.2018, the Investigating Officer Amit Gupta was posted as Sub-Inspector at Ambikapur Police Station. On 20.09.2018 at 19:10, Sub-Inspector Amit Gupta received information from an informer that two persons, Ambika Vishwakarma and Narayan Das, are standing on the side of the main road of Parsa with illegal narcotics syrup in a bag and are waiting for a small vehicle to come from Ambikapur. On the said information, notice was served to the witnesses through Constable No.464 Abhay Choubey and witness Manish Upadhyay, S/o Shyamdhar Upadhyay, age 35 years and Gurucharan Singh alias Guddu S/o late Rajendra Singh, age 38 years, both residents of Mayapur Ambikapur were summoned and informed about the informer information and informer information panchnama Ex. P-2 was prepared in front of the witnesses and a copy of the information was sent to the City Police Superintendent of Police, Ambikapur. Due to the City Superintendent of Police being out of the office on tour and due to time taken in obtaining search warrant, there was full possibility of the goods being destroyed, hence for verification of the information without obtaining a search warrant, information about departure was sent to the City Superintendent of Police Ambikapur as per Ex.P-4. Thereafter, along with constable 450 Sanjiv Choubey, constable 500 Pravind Singh, constable 464 Abhay Choubey and the above mentioned witnesses, in Government vehicle No. CG 03/6430 with necessary documents and kit, left for Parsa. Reaching the place mentioned by the informant in village Parsa, the area was cordoned off and as per the description given by the informer, both the persons were caught in front of Parsa Middle School and interrogated, who told their names as Ambika Vishwakarma, son of Shiv Prasad Vishwakarma, resident of Chainpur, police station Lakhanpur and Narayan Das, son of late Ramdas, resident of village Kevra, police station Lakhanpur. Both the suspects were informed about the informer's information and were given notice Ex.P-6 under Section-50 NDPS Act, on which the suspects gave acceptance for their respective search as per Ex.P-7. Thereafter, the accused were made to search the witnesses, accompanying staff, and their own vehicle one by one. When no suspicious or objectionable item was found with them, then search panchnama Ex.P-4 for witnesses was prepared. Search panchnama Ex.P-9 for police staff and search panchnama Ex.P-10 for Investigating Officer himself was prepared. Thereafter, on search of suspect Ambika Vishwkarma, a cement colour trolley bag with Flyte King company's monochrome was found in his possession, which was opened and searched. R.C. KUFF COUGH SYRUP total 143 pieces, each containing 100 ml was found in it and a backpack in possession of second suspect Narayan Das which was blackish light sky blue in colour and of the company TYCOON was opened and searched which contained CODECTUS COUGH SYRUP 70 pieces, each containing 100 ml and ELDER QREX COUGH SYRUP 23
The court affirmed the conviction under the NDPS Act, ruling that the entire weight of narcotic mixtures must be considered for determining commercial quantity, and modified the sentence from 12 to 1....
The judgment establishes the importance of considering neutral substances in determining the small or commercial quantity of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, as well as the conversion of Di....
The possession of cough syrup containing Codeine Phosphate falls within the purview of the NDPS Act and is covered as an essential narcotic drug under Section 9(1)(a)(va) of the NDPS Act. The entire ....
Grant of Bail - Narcotics substances - Quantity of Codeine - The total weight of manufactured drug or preparation including neutral material is required to be considered while determining small quant....
The legal determination of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act must consider both narcotic content and neutral substances, necessitating a larger bench's evaluation due to conflicting interpretati....
Petitioner's claim of personal use for seized narcotics was rejected; court deemed LSD a commercial quantity under NDPS Act, validating the ongoing investigation.
Possession of cough syrup containing codeine qualifies as a narcotic under the NDPS Act, with strict bail conditions imposed that were not satisfied in this case.
If the contraband recovered in a particular case is covered by Rule 52A of the NDPS Rules made under Section 9(1)(a)(va) of the NDPS Act, then violation of the said Rules would be punishable under th....
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.