SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Guj) 807

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :A.M.KAPADIA, K.A.PUJ
SAIYED SALIM SAIYED HUSSAIN SAIYED - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 524 Of 2000
Decided On : 12/18/2006

Advocates Appeared: K.T.DAVE, M.H.M.SHAIKH

Headnote:

Criminal law - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 8 (c) read with Sections 21 and 29 – Criminal Procedure Code - Criminal trial – Convicted –Found Charas – Appeal against Conviction – Muddamal – Appellant for commission of offences punishable arraigned on charge of having found with contraband article charas weighing grams without pass or permit when was intercepted and apprehended near Mills Cross Roads adjacent to SRP Point on basis of prior information received Senior Police Inspector - At end of trial accused was found guilty of offences with which was charged and as his complicity is proved Judge of trial Court convicted him vide judgment and order for commission of offences punishable - Aggrieved by aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence accused has filed this appeal - Held, It is true that judge of trial Court has through inadvertent mistake framed charge against accused for commission of offence punishable NDPS Act which is a mistake apparent on face of record as possessing the contraband article chars without pass or permit is punishable of NDPS Act - Code in terms stipulates that no finding sentence or order by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be deemed invalid merely on ground that no charge was framed or on ground of any error omission or irregularity in charge including any misjoinder of charges unless in opinion of Court of appeal confirmation or revision a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby - In instant case according to this court error committed Judge of trial Court in framing charge has not resulted into failure of justice and no prejudice has been caused to accused - Therefore this court being a Court of appeal, can modify/alter the order of conviction by convicting accused for commission of offence punishable trial Court has framed charge against accused for commission of offence of NDPS Act also - This shows that Judge of trial Court has committed an inadvertent mistake which we correct in this judgment - Appeal dismissed (Para 33)

A. M. KAPADIA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant ( the accused for short) was tried by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 13, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 255 of 1999 for commission of the offences punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( ndps Act for short), arraigned on the charge of having found with contraband article charas weighing 257 grams, without pass or permit, when he was intercepted and apprehended near Lal Mills Cross Roads, adjacent to SRP Point, Gomtipur, on the basis of the prior information received by P. W. 1, Ravindrakumar Kashiram Bhatt, Senior Police Inspector. At the end of the trial, the accused was found guilty of the offences with which he was charged and as his complicity is proved, the learned Judge of the trial Court convicted him vide judgment and order dated 5. 5. 2000 for commission of the offences punishable under sections 8 (c) read with Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for ten years and fine of Rs. 1 lakh i. d. , R. I. for further period of one year. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the accused has filed this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( the Code for short ).

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial, is as under:

1 ). P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt, Senior P. I. Gomtipur Police Station, received a secret information from informant to the effect that a person, put on black trouser and black shirt with white stripes, would be coming from Kalandari Masjid, going through the Lal Mills Cross Roads and going towards Usha Talkies on a Scooter bearing Registration No. GRM 4286 with narcotic substance in the dickey of the scooter.

2 ). On receipt of the said information, P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt, went to Gomtipur Police Station and recorded the said secret information in the station diary and also sent copies thereof to his official superiors i. e. , ACP "h" Division and DCP, Zone V. Thereafter he requisitioned service of two persons to act as panchas. After procuring presence of two panchas, he conveyed the said secret information to the two panchas and also to the members of the raiding party. Accordingly, he prepared the preliminary panchnama to the said effect.

3 ). After preparing the preliminary panchnama, he along with the panchas and the members of the raiding party went to Lal Mills Cross Road and kept vigil on the road. It is also the case of the prosecution that at about 19. 00 hours, a person corresponding to the description given in the secret information, came on the scooter No. GRM 4286. P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt, intercepted and apprehended him and informed him that, as per the secret information received by him, he had information about narcotic substance being carried by a person corresponding to the description of the accused. On inquiring his name, the accused informed that his name is Saiyed Salim Saiyed Hussain. The accused was given a written memo in compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt also informed the accused that as per the secret information he wants to search him and if the accused prefers that he should be searched in presence of a gazetted officer or a magistrate, he would make arrangement for the same but the accused did not opt for that and informed P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt that he may be searched by him. Thereupon, P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt searched the person of the accused and on opening the dickey of the scooter, a plastic bag was found and therein he found two semi circular lumpy substance. P. W. 1, R. K. Bhatt, thereafter called G. D. Sharma, an Officer of FSL, who, on preliminary examination, opined that the substance recovered was charas . Thereafter, Sakal Rajaram, a gold-smith, was called for weighing the contraband article and on weighing it, it was found that the contraba














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top