High Court of Delhi
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
Ram Prakash
Versus
State of Delhi
Crl. Appeal No. 1363 of 2014
Decided On : 10-12-2014
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20(b) (ii) (C), 42, 43 - Search and seizure - Contraband - Recovery of Ganja - Possession - Acquittal - Failure by the prosecution to associate public witnesses with suspicion - Secret information only gave the name of a person with an incomplete address without even broadly describing his features or some marks of identification which could then be verified - It is inconceivable that a single individual operating all by himself could take delivery of a consignment of 120 kg and then pass it on to anyone - There is a total failure by the police to even try and investigate who was behind the particular transaction - Appellant could not be acting by himself if he was going to collect 120 kg of ganja at the Old Delhi Railway Station - Unless he was a weightlifter of sorts, he could not be expected to be carrying the entire stock himself - When the raiding party reached there, appellant was found sitting on the three jute bags of ganja - It is unclear, to whom was he going to deliver the consignment - Who is the original supplier and where is the consignment coming from - Held, case of the prosecution have not been proved against the Appellant beyond all reasonable doubt - Benefit of doubt ought to be given to the Appellant - Impugned judgment on sentence is set aside - Appeal is allowed - Appellant shall be released.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2nd July 2014 passed by the learned Special Judge in SC No. 68 of 2011 convicting the Appellant for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) and the order on sentence dated 8th July 2014 sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for 11 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1.25 lakhs and in default to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for six months.
The case of the prosecution
2. ASI Mahender Singh PW-9 stated that on 4th June, 2011, at around 1.30 pm a secret informer conveyed to him that Ram Prakash (the Appellant), resident of District Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh and presently residing in Jahangir Puri and who was indulging in the supply of ganja in Delhi would come to the Old Delhi Railway Station at around 3.30 pm, would load ganja from the parking lot situated towards Western side and then proceed to Jahangir Puri. PW-9 apprised Inspector Kuldeep Singh (PW-10) posted at the Narcotics Cell, Shakarpur. He recorded DD No. 14 at around 2 pm. PW-10 made enquiries from the informer and after being satisfied passed on the information telephonically to Mohd. Iqbal, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Narcotics. Daily Diary (DD) No.14 dated 4th June 2011 was received by the Head Constable (HC) Om Prakash (PW-2) and was entered in Diary No. 996. The said DD entry according to PW-2 was placed before the ACP Mohd. Iqbal, who after going through its contents, put his initials thereon. The ACP ordered a raid to be conducted.
3. PW-9 constituted a raiding party of comprising himself, PW-2, HC Mukesh (PW-4), HC Braham Dev, HC Rajesh and the secret informer. PW-9 took with him the Investigating Officer (IO) kit bag, field testing kit, electronic weighing machine and spring weighing scale. He is stated to have made departure entry vide DD No. 15 at around 2.15 pm, before leaving the Narcotic Cell in a government vehicle driven by HC Rajesh Kumar.
The raid proceedings
4. PW-9 stated that they reached Old Delhi Railway Station via Pushta Road, Geeta Colony, Shanti Van, Yamuna Bridge, Ring Road, Yamuna Bazaar, Koudia Pul. They alighted a little ahead from Church Mission Red Light. The secret informer pointed to a person sitting on the right side of Old Delhi Railway Station parking gate, Western side and stated that he was Ram Prakash. Thereafter, the secret informer left the place.
5. The police then crossed the road and apprehended the Appellant at around 3 pm. At that time the Appellant was sitting on three bags.
6. PW-9 stated that he gave notice under Section 50 NDPS Act to the Appellant (Ex.PW4/A), whereby he conveyed to the Appellant that he had information that the Appellant was possessing ganja and further informed him that he has a legal right to have his search conducted before any Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. PW-9 also informed him that the Appellant could take a search of the raiding party as well as their vehicle before his personal search was conducted. The Appellant had refused all of the above. Accordingly, PW-9 wrote the said reply on the notice, read over the contents and thereafter the Appellant put his signatures thereon (Ex.PW4/B). PW-9 stated that some public persons had gathered at the spot. He requested 5-6 persons to join the proceedings, but they declined.
7. On opening of three bags, PW-9 found grass and seed like material and on smelling it he came to know that it was ganja. Each of the bags were weighed and found to be containing 40 kg ganja including the weight of bags. PW-9 then took two samples of 250 gm from each of the bags. They were kept in two separate transparent polythene bags tied with rubber band and then kept in two separate cloth parcels and were given Marks A and B. The remaining ganja was kept in a separate bag and tied with cloth patti. All the three bags were tied and were given the Marks C, D and E. PW-9 affixed the seal of 5APS NB Delhi
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.