2003 Supreme(Mad) 868
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
Mastan Gouse Mohideen - Appellant
Versus
Government of India - Respondents
C.A.No.355 of 2000
Decided On : 25 June 2003
Section 50 of the Act only provides search of the person before gazetted officer.
Headnote:Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Section 50-Search of person before Gazetted Officer-Bag containing articles was being carried by accused-Held, search of bag is not search of person-Section 50 not attracted.
The appellant/A-1 herein who stood charged and tried along with another under S.8(c) r/w 21 and 29 of N.D.P.S. Act, was found guilty by the Court below and convicted under S.8(c) r/w 21 of N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1.00 lakh and in default to undergo one year R.I. while the second accused was acquitted.
2. The facts which led the lower Court to frame the charges under the provisions of the NDPS Act can shortly be stated as follows:
(a) The complainant is the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. The first accused Mastan Gouse Mohideen was the holder of the Indian Passport and bound for Colombo by Indian Airlines Flight No.IC 573 on 16.10.1997. When he was intercepted by the Intelligence Officer, Air Intelligence Unit, Anna International Airport, Chennai, after clearance through emigration and customs, a suspicion arose whether he might be carrying the prohibited items with him. In the presence of two witnesses his baggages were examined by the Superintendent of Customs. From his bagage 24 plastic containers with labels 'Regaul Liquid Blue" was recovered. On detailed examination, they were found to contain 8007 grams of narcotic substance. The appellant/A-1 volunteered to give a statement as to his role in the commission of the offence. He was arrested at about 8.00 hours on 17.10.97 and produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Economic Offence-I, Madras. A departmental custody was sought for and the same was ordered. The Department was directed to produce the appellant/A-1 on or before 20.10.1997. In his further statement, A-1 has stated that 12 plastic containers containing narcotic substance were given to him by Mallika and 12 plastic containers containing narcotic substance were given by Selvam and Vasu and that one Michael has assisted by arranging the travel documents. On getting all the informations regarding those persons and on his identification, the second accused in the case was located. His house was searched on 18.10.97 under a search warrant. At that time, the second accused was not present. The passport size photograph of the second accused was seized under a mahazar and nothing incriminating was found in his house. As per the directions, the second accused appeared before the Superintendent of Customs on 18.10.97 at about 5.30 P.M., and he gave a voluntary statement. In his statement, it was categorically admitted that he has arranged for the travel documents at the instance of Mallika and that he requested the Customs Officer that he would appear the next day, and his request was accepted. A summon under S.67 of the NDPS Act was issued on 18.10.97 to appear before the Customs Authorities. Accordingly he appeared on 19.10.97. On 19.10.97, the first accused identified the second accused who arranged travel tickets. The further voluntary statement of the first accused was recorded. Both the accused were produced before the Magistrate for the purpose of remand.
(b) The samples that were taken at the time of the seizure, were sent for chemical analysis laboratory, attached to the Customs House, through Court, and the report confirmed that it was a manufactured drug covered under the provisions of the NDPS Act, 1985. The seized contraband samples and the material objects were deposited at the Airport Warehouse of the Customs Department, and they were produced before the remanding Magistrate. The properties were kept in the safe custody of the Customs Warehouse and produced before the Court after ensuring the receipt of records from the Court on 22.10.97. The complainant in compliance of the orders of the Court deposited the properties in the safe custody of the Airport Warehouse, which godown was a designated godown. After the chemical analysis, the remnant sample was submitted to the Court and was also returned to the complainant for safe custody. In the course of investigation it was found that during October 1997 at Chennai, A-1 and