Rajasthan High Court
Honble SUNIL KUMAR GARG, J.
Mushtaq Shah - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 1996
Decided On : September 05, 2000
(2). The facts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are as follows:-
On 5.5.1994 at about 7.30 AM, PW4 Bhagwat Singh, SHO Police Station Nikum, Distt. Chittorgarh received a secret information that Khalasi of Meenaxi Bus, which goes from Sangaria to Arnoda, would carry contraband opium in a gunny bag. That information was reduced in writing by PW 4 Bhagwat Singh in Ex.P/8. Thereafter, PW4 Bhagwat Singh alongwith PW 5 Balwant Singh, PW6 Prahlad Singh and other police officials proceeded in a Jeep and reached Village Kalander Khera. At about 8.45 AM, Meenaxi Bus bearing No. RJ 27P 0020 came and it was stopped and two independent witnesses, namely PW1 Hasan Khan and PW 8 Bhanwaroo were taken and one person was found sitting on the seat of Khalasi and on being enquired, he told his name as Mushtaq Shah S/o Gafoor Shah, resident of Ranikheda presently Arnoda, Police Station Nimbahera (accused appellant). A gunny bag beneath the seat of accused appellant was found and on being asked about the said gunny beg, accused appellant told that it belonged to him. Thereafter, accused appellant was asked to come down from the Bus and gunny bag was also taken down from the Bus. It is further stated that there-after, PW4 Bhagwat Singh gave a notice Ex.P.1 u/S. 50 of the NDPS Act to the accused appellant informing him whether he wanted to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. After receiving the said notice, he gave his consent and, thereafter, PW4 Bhagwat Singh, in the presence of motbirans PW1 Hasan Khan and PW8 Bhanwaroo, opened the said gunny bag and on opening, a polythene bag of green colour containing opium was found and on weighing, its weight was found to be 1kg. 900 grams, out of which, two samples of 30 grms. each were taken and marked as A/1 and A/2 and rest of the opium was marked as `A and they were sealed on the spot. The fard of search and seizure was prepared by PW4 Bhagwat Singh and the same is Ex.P/2. The accused appellant was arrested through Ex.P/5. Thereafter, the articles recovered and accused appellant were brought by PW4 Bhagwat Singh to the Police Station and Parcha Kayami Ex.P/9 was prepared by him and on the basis of that Parcha Kayami, FIR No. 52/94 Ex.P/10 u/S. 8/18 of the NDPS Act was chalked out. Specimen seals were also taken separately on Ex.P/3 and articles recovered from the accused appellant alongwith samples were handed over by PW4 Bhagwat Singh to PW10 Yashwant Singh, who deposited and entered the same in the Malkhana and the copy of the Malkhana Register is Ex.P/12 and one sample was given by PW10 Yashwant Singh to PW6 Prahlad Singh for depositing in the FSL. Then, P.W.6 Prahlad Singh went to SP Office, Chittorgarh and after obtaining forwarding letter Ex.P/1 from SP office, he deposited the sample in the FSL, Jaipur and the receipt of depositing the sample in the FSL is Ex.P/12. The FSL report is Ex.P/11, where it has been mentioned that sample contained in the packet marked A/1 gave positive tests for the chief constituents of the coagulated juice of opium poppy having 1.78% (one point seven eight percent) morphine.
(3). After usual investigation, the police submitted challan against the accused appellant for committing offence under section 8/18 of the NDPS Act.
(4). The learned Sessions Judge on 15.2.1995 framed the charge under section 8/18 of the NDPS Act against the accused appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecutio
2. Mohinder Kumar vs. The State Panaji
3. State of Punjab vs. Baldev Singh (AIR 1999 SC 2378).–Followed.
SupremeToday
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.