High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Sunil Kumar Garg
Ram Chandra - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Union of India - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal Nos. 49 and 50 of 1996
Decided On : 03/27/2001
NDPS Act - Conviction under Section 8/18 - Compliance of Section 50 and 57 - Interpretation of Notification No. 6/85 - Validity of search and seizure by Sub Inspector - Compliance of Section 50 and 57 upheld - Minor discrepancies in witness statements not affecting the case
Fact of the Case:
The accused appellants were convicted under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act based on the seizure of contraband opium. The main proceedings were conducted by a Sub Inspector, leading to challenges regarding the validity of the search and seizure.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the compliance of Section 50 and 57 of the NDPS Act, ruling that the search and seizure conducted by the Sub Inspector were valid. The court also dismissed arguments based on minor discrepancies in witness statements.
Issues: Validity of search and seizure by Sub Inspector, Compliance of Section 50 and 57, Witness discrepancies
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Notification No. 6/85 to include Sub Inspectors in the authorization for search and seizure. It held that compliance of Section 50 and 57 was upheld, and minor discrepancies in witness statements did not affect the case.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, confirming the conviction of the accused appellants under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act.
Sunil Kumar Garg, J.- The above mentioned two appeals being S.B. Criminal Appeals No. 49/96 and 5 0/96 are being decided by this common Judgment as they have arisen from the same incident, though trial in the lower court has taken place separately and separate Judgment has been passed by the lower court.
2. Both theappeals have been filed by the accused appellants Ram Chandra and Birma Ram against the Judgment and order dated 19.1995 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 241/94 & 242/94 by which he convicted both the accused appellants for the offence Under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychoirophic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act’) and sentenced each of them to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. one lac, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two years RI. Facts of S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 49/96 (Ram Chandra v. The State of Rajasihan & the Union of India)
3. Necessary facts giving rises to this appeal, in short, are as follows:-On 38.1984 at about 11.30 PM, PW6 Prem Raj Raihore, Sub Inspector, Central Bureau of Narcotics, Udaipur lodged a report Ex.P/10 to PW5 Roshanlal, Superintendent, Central Bureau of Narcotics, Udaipur stating inter-alia that on 38.1994 PW5 Roshanlal constituted a party of the officials of the Central Bureau of Narcotics consisting of himself , PW4 Rakesh Bhargava, PW3 Heeralal and PW6 Prem Raj Rathore for the purpose of making surprise checking and they all proceeded in a Government Jeep No. MP07/B-0140 towards Check Post on Chittorgarh Road, Udaipur for checking in order to prevent smuggling of contraband articles etc. It is further stated in the report that when they were doing the work of checking, at about 8.30 PM in the night, a Bus bearing No. RJ14P-1136 came from the side of Bhatewar and that Bus was got stopped by PW4 Rakesh Bhargava. When the Bus stopped, the conductor of that Bus told that this Bus is of the Depot of Udaipur and has come from Dhariyawad and going to Udaipur. Thereafter, PW6 Prem Raj Rathore alongwilh PW4 Rakesh Bhargava and PW5 Roshanlal entered in the Bus and they found two persons sitting behind the seat of the Conductor and they were found in suspicious condition and on suspicion, two motbirs, namely, PW1 Gurmeet Singh and PW2 Surjeet Singh were called and on being asked, one person told his name as Ram Chandra Sb Bharuram (present accused appellant) and at that lime, he was having a bag of urea. Thereafter, the accused appellant was alighted from the Bus and PW6 Prem Raj Rathore asked the accused appellant that he wanted to search his bag since he had suspicion that it contained opium and he further asked the accused
appellant whether he wanted to be searched before the Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. Upon this, the accused appellant denied and said that he could be searched by PW6 Prem Raj Rathore himself Thereafter, search of the bag, which was found on the person of accused appellant, was made and on search one polythene pouch was recovered and on opening this polythene pouch, one more polythene pouch containing black substance was recovered and it was assessed that it was nothing, but contraband opium. Thereafter, it was weighed by PW3 Heeralal and its weight was found to be 1kg. 25ogrms., out of which two samples of 24 grms. each were taken and both samples and rest opium were sealed on spot. The fard of earch and seizure was also prepared on the spot by PW 6 Prem Raj Rathore and the same is Ex.P/1. The specimen seal was taken by PW6 Prem Raj Rathore on separate paper and the same is Ex.P/2 and accused appellant was arrested through Ex.P/3. With letter Ex.P/8 through PW3 Heeralal, sample was sent for chemical analysis to the Manager, Govt. Opium and Alkaloid Works, Neemuch (MP) and the receipt of the sample is Ex.P/9 and the report of the Asstt. Chemical Examiner, Government Opium & Alkaloid Works, Government of India Neemuch (MP) is Ex. P/17,
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.