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

2024 Supreme(Gau) 1780

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.
Zosangzuali - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Mizoram and Ors. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2023
Decided On : 29-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Benjamin Lalthlamuana, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mary Lalruatkimi Khiangte, Additional Public Prosecutor

The prosecution must prove foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt; discrepancies in evidence can lead to acquittal.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act, 1985 - Section 21(b) - Conviction for illegal possession of heroin - Appellant convicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and fine - Prosecution failed to prove foundational facts regarding the seized contraband - Discrepancies in sample weight and marking led to reasonable doubt - Impugned judgment set aside. (Paras 2, 36, 42)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374 - Appeal against conviction - Burden of proof lies with prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt - Failure to do so results in benefit of doubt to the accused. (Paras 40, 42)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for possession of 21.28 grams of heroin, seized from her residence. The prosecution's evidence included witness testimonies and forensic analysis, but discrepancies in sample handling were noted.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish that the analyzed sample was the same as that seized, leading to a lack of proof regarding the contraband's nature.

Issues: The main issues were the discrepancies in the sample handling and whether the prosecution met its burden of proof.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's failure to prove the connection between the seized contraband and the analyzed sample warranted the appellant's acquittal.

Result: Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.

1. Heard Mr. Benjamin Lalthlamuana, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. Mary Lalruatkimi Khiangte, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Mizoram.

2. This appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the appellant Smt. Zosangzuali, impugning the judgment dated 18.04.2023 and order dated 24.04.2023, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Fast Track Court, Kolasib, Mizoram whereby the present appellant was convicted under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months. The period of detention already undergone was directed to be set aside against the term of sentence imposed.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are as follows:

    i. That on 28.01.2020, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Fast Track Court, Kolasib, Mizoram received a complaint, filed by the complainant, Joseph C. Lalhmangiahzuala, Sub-Inspector of Excise and Narcotic, Kolasib, inter-alia, alleging that, on 27.09.2019, at about 7.30 AM, Sub-Inspector Lalduhzuala Ngente raided the residence of the present appellant at Khungpuilam, Kolasib and recovered 21.28 grams of yellowish powder suspected to be heroin, kept in 600 small plastic phials, from the almirah in the bedroom of the house of the appellant.

    ii. The recovered contraband was immediately seized and the appellant was arrested on the same day.

    iii. The Seizing Officer had also submitted a report of seizure and arrest to the Officer-in-Charge of Excise and Narcotic Stations, Kolasib and a case bearing No. EX-KLB/95/19 dated 27.09.2019 under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 was registered. The complainant, Joseph C. Lalhmangiahzuala was entrusted to investigate the case. The complainant took steps for preparation of inventory of the seized contraband and drawal of sample from the same before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalasib. He also took steps for sending the sample of the contraband to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Aizawl for chemical analysis. It was also found that at the time of arrest, the appellant had mentioned her name wrongly as Lalsungzuali instead of Zosangzuali. The complainant collected the Chemical Analysis Report from Forensic Laboratory, Aizawl which gave positive test for heroin in the samples with purity of about 77%. It is also stated in complaint that during interrogation, the appellant admitted being involved in illegal possession and selling of banned drugs.

    iv. On receipt of the said complaint, SC(K) No. 3 of 2020 was registered under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985.

    v. The appellant faced the trial, remaining in judicial custody, as she was not enlarged on bail during the trial.

    vi. On 05.02.2020, the Trial Court framed charge under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 against the appellant. When the said charge was read over and explained to the appellant, she pleaded not guilty and claimed to the tried.

    vii. The prosecution side examined five (05) prosecution witnesses to bring home the charge against the present appellant.

    viii. The appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 during which, she denied the truthfulness of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and pleaded her innocence. She also adduced evidence of one defence witness in her defence.

    ix. However, ultimately by the judgment and order which are impugned in this appeal, the appellant was convicted and sentenced in the manner as described in Paragraph No. 2 hereinabove.

4. Before considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for both the sides, let us go through the evidence available on record.

5. PW-1, Shri A.C. Vanlalhuma, who is a teacher by profession, has deposed that on 27.09.2019, at ab

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