Sentence serving convicts are in appeal from jail. They were prosecuted in Marioni GRPS Case No.11 of 2006 and were convicted under Section 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1 lac and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year by the learned Sessions Judge Golaghat vide judgment dated 16.8.2007 rendered in Sessions (special) case No.5 of 2006. They have preferred the appeal individually against the said judgment and as such both appeals, for the sake of convenience, are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The prosecution case is this. One Sri Girindra Nath Haloi, Incharge of Furkating Government Railway Police Out Post, (GR OP in short), along with his staff, while checking luggages at Platform No.1 of Furkating Railway Station, found one unattended steel trunk and when he made an enquiry about it, the accused appellants came forward as owners of the said trunk. When the trunk was opened some spamo proxyvon relipan and orange coloured capsules were found. He suspected the capsules to be Narcotic drugs and on suspicion he brought the accused persons along with the trunk to Furkating GR Out Post . In the Out Post , during interrogation, both the accused persons admitted that those capsules were drugs and they brought the same for business. Thereafter, he seized the trunk along with capsules and handed over the same along with the accused persons to Marioni GR Police Station as the Furkating G.R.Out Post falls under the said Police Station. The O.C.concerned seized the trunk and capsules in presence of some witnesses and sent the sample to FSL, Guwahati for chemical test and report. The sample capsules tested positive and the accused were arrested under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. On completion of the investigation the police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 22 of the NDPS Act. On consideration of materials on record charge was framed under Section 22 of the NDPS Act. The charge being read over and explained, the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to face the trial. The prosecution examined 7(seven) witnesses and the defence examined none. In their statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., both the accused persons stated that they were falsely implicated by police inasmuch as on the relevant day they were waiting in the platform for train and having tea at a tea stall in the Railway Platform. They were brought to the police station on suspicion with the trunk and forced them to say that they were the owner of the said trunk which was lying in the platform No.1 of Furkating Railway Station. The learned trial court, on consideration of materials, evidence on record and upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated above.

3. I have heard Ms. Nandita Bharali, learned counsel as Amicus Curiae in Criminal Appeal No.150(J)/07 and Ms. Pallavi Talukdar, learned counsel as Amicus Curiae in Criminal Appeal No.151(J)/07 and Mr. D.Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State Respondent. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants as Amicus Curiae, have made common submissions which are as follows- (i) The O.C.of the GRPS having lodged the written FIR and investigated the case in violation of the accepted principle of law that the complainant can not take into himself the task of investigation, vitiated the entire proceeding and as such the impugned conviction and sentence, for the sake of fairness and impartiality in criminal trial, is liable to be quashed and set aside. (ii) Conscious and exclusive possession of the trunk containing the articles suspected to be contraband having not been proved by the prosecution by producing independent witness, the learned trial court illegally and erroneously convicted the accused appellants which is unsustainable in law. (iii) The prosecution, except the seizu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document