IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Anandam Gundluru – Appellant
Versus
Inspector of Police, NCB/MDS, Chennai – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 2017
Decided on : 01-09-2022
NDPS Act - Heroin Possession - Sections 8(c), 21(c), 22(b), 23(c), 29 - The court discussed the application of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, presumption of culpable mental state, and conscious possession of contraband by the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was found guilty of possessing heroin with intent to transport illegally to Kuwait. The trial court convicted the accused based on evidence of possession and communication with the absconding accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of possession of heroin under Sections 21(c) and 23(c) of the NDPS Act, but not guilty under Sections 22(b) and 29. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused had conscious possession of the contraband and whether the prosecution had proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the evidence of possession, communication, and the presumption of culpable mental state. It found that the prosecution failed to prove conscious possession and set aside the conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment of the trial court was set aside, and the accused was acquitted.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., r/w Section 36-B of NDPS Act, 1985 to set aside the conviction and sentence rendered by the II Additional Special Judge for NDPS Act, Chennai dated 09.01.2017 in C.C.No.15 of 2015 in NCB F.No.48/1/11/2014 on the file of the NCB/MDS Chennai and acquit the accused.)
1. The Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB), Chennai is the complainant. The appellant, Anandam Gundluru is the accused. The complaint against the appellant alleging conscious possession of about 1½ kg of Heroin with intention to transport illegally to Kuwait, thereby committed offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 21(c), 22(b), 23(c) and 29 of Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, tried before the Special Court for NDPS Act Cases at Chennai in C.C.No.15/2015.
2. To prove the charges 8 witnesses, 47 documents and 10 Material Objects were relied on the said of the complainant. The Trial court found the accused guilty of offence under Sections 21 (c) and 23 (c) of NDPS Act. Found him not guilty of offence under Sections 22 (b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence of 10 years RI with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo one year RI for each of the offence, the present appeal is filed.
4. The facts of the case as spoken by the witnesses:-
PW-1 (Mr.M.R.Aravind), the Intelligent Officer of NCB, Chennai while in Office on 15/09/2014 received an information through phone that one Venkateswara Rao of Chittor, Andra Pradesh (absconding accused) through Anandam Gundluru (accused/appellant herein) planning to send 1 ½ Kg of Heroin by Fly Emirates Flight, which leaves Chennai at 21.45 hrs that night. This telephonic information was reduced into writing (Ex.P-1) and placed before PW-7 (Mr.Dev Anand, the Superintendent, NCB). As per the direction of PW-7, he formed a Team and reached Chennai Airport. Got introduced to Mr.S.Kathiresan (Security Officer, Air India) and P.Muthu Selvakumar (Senior Ramp Service Agent) and requested them to be witnesses to the proceedings. They proceeded to the Custom Examination Area in the depature hall of Chennai International Airport. They started checking the passports of the passengers coming after immigration clearance. They identified Anandam Gundluru (accused) from his passport and interrogated him, after disclosing their identity. The intention to search him and his baggage was conveyed to the accused through PW-4 (A. Ravi Kannan, Surveillance Assistant, NCB). The right under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was explained to the accused. Through the Fly Emirates staff, the checked-in-luggage bags of the accused were brought and identified with the baggage tags. On examining the black colour Air bag, they found many packets of food items and at the bottom a black colour polythene packet wrapped with brown colour adhesive tape was found. On opening the packet, they found 3 Food Grade packets. In side the first food grade packet, they found brown colour powder, which tested positive to heroin, when tested with the field test kit. 958 grams of heroin was seized and sealed with NCB mark in separate packet after drawing two samples each 5 grams. The samples were marked as S-1 and S-2. The balance 948 grams packet marked as P-1. Inside the second food grade packet, they found brown colour powder, which tested positive to heroin when tested with the field test kit. 419 grams of heroin was seized and sealed with NCB mark, in separate packet after drawing two samples each 5 grams. The samples were marked as S-3 and S-4. The balance 409 grams packet marked as P-2. Inside the third food grade packet, they found crystalline powder. When tested with the field test kit, it answered Methamphetamine. It weighed 10 grams. Two samples each 5 grams was drawn and packed with NCB seal. The samples were marked as S-5 and S-6.
5. Thereafter, personal search was conducted. Two boarding passes, 2 baggage tags, E-ticket to Kuwait, Passport, Kuw
AI
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove conscious possession of contraband and the application of presumption of culpable mental state unde....
No one can be convicted contrary to Law of Evidence.
Point of law: While upholding the constitutional validity of sections 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act, the Apex Court has, however, reiterated that more serious the offence, the stricter would be the degre....
The judgment established that the gravity of the offence, the impact of the illicit drug trade, and the concept of conscious possession are crucial factors in determining bail eligibility under the N....
The court upheld the convictions under the N.D.P.S. Act due to established constructive possession of heroin, emphasizing the validity of procedures followed during the search and seizure.
Compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, admissibility of accused statements, and applicability of Section 50 of the Act.
The prosecution failed to prove the possession of narcotics and did not comply with mandatory statutory requirements, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court held that the Intelligence Officer was authorized to file a complaint under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. It also held that the mandatory provisions of Section 50 and Section 57 were complied....
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.