Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
Khadak Bahadur Gautam – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
Appellant Khadak Bahadur Gautam has filed the present appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Cr.P.C.’) against the judgment of conviction, dated 16.09.2019, and order of sentence, dated 20.09.2019, passed by the learned Special Judge, Ghumarwin, (Camp at Bilaspur), District Bilaspur, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial Court’).
2. By way of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred to hereinabove, the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘accused’) for the commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS’) Act, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- and in case of non-payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
3. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, before this Court, may be summed up as under:-
The police of Police Station Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P., has submitted charge sheet, disclosing therein, that AS
Minor contradictions in witness statements do not undermine the credibility of the prosecution's case, and the trial court's conviction was upheld.
The prosecution must prove possession of contraband beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of essential witnesses and physical evidence compromises the conviction.
Point of Law : It is not necessary that without support of independent witness, prosecution case cannot stand, however, for arriving at such conclusion, evidence led by prosecution must appear to be ....
The court reaffirmed that in narcotic cases, the prosecution bears a heavy burden of proof, and any reasonable doubt resulting from discrepancies leads to acquittal.
The court confirmed the conviction under the NDPS Act, ruling that compliance with statutory provisions was sufficient, and reduced the sentence due to the appellant's age and health conditions.
Conviction under drug statutes requires consistent evidence; discrepancies in witness testimonies can invalidate the prosecution's case.
Appeal against NDPS acquittal dismissed upholding trial court due to contradictions in official testimonies, document/FIR anomalies, weight discrepancies creating reasonable doubt; appellate interfer....
NDPS conviction upheld in chance recovery despite hostile independent witness and minor official contradictions; non-association of independents not fatal; case property integrity via intact seals; S....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
