SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3188

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
Sadiq Basha - Appellant
Versus
State by The Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau Chennai Zonal Unit Chennai - Respondent
CRL.A.No. 517 of 2018 & CRL.M.P.No. 16399 of 2018
Decided On : 29-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Anand Grover, Sr.Counsel for R. Rajan, Advocate. For the Respondent: N.P. Kumar, Spl.Public Prosecutor.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of evidence, compliance with legal procedures, and the relevance of the appellant's confession statement and plea for leniency in determining the final decision.

Headnote:

NDPS Act - Criminal Appeal - Sections 8(c) r/w 29, 8(c) r/w 22(c) and 8(c) r/w.28 - The court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo 10 years RI and pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for each of the offences. The appellant challenged the judgment on various grounds including fair investigation, compliance with legal procedures, and admissibility of evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was charged for offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 29, 8(c) r/w 22(c) and 8(c) r/w.28 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution's case was based on the seizure of 2.970 Kgs of Methamphetamine from the appellant and another accused at Chennai Central Railway Station. The appellant challenged the judgment on the grounds of fair investigation, compliance with legal procedures, and admissibility of evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the investigation was fair and complied with legal procedures. It held that the evidence including the seizure, search, and recording of statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were admissible. The court also found that the appellant's confession statement and his plea for leniency did not warrant acquittal.

Issues: The issues before the court included the fairness of the investigation, compliance with legal procedures such as Section 42 of the NDPS Act, admissibility of electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, and the relevance of the Section 67 statements.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the investigation was fair and complied with legal procedures. It found that the evidence including the seizure, search, and recording of statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act were admissible. The court also ruled that the appellant's confession statement and his plea for leniency did not warrant acquittal.

Final Decision: The court partly allowed the Criminal Appeal, upholding the appellant's conviction and sentence for the offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 29, 8(c) r/w 22(c) of the NDPS Act. The court modified the default sentence to one month and ordered the release of the appellant if he had already undergone the substantive sentence and default sentence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the entire records in connection with the impugned Judgment dated 24.07.2018 made in C.C.No.45 of 2015 by the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under the EC and NDPS Act, Chennai and set aside the same as illegal.)

This Criminal Appeal arises out of the Judgment passed by the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under the EC and NDPS Act, Chennai in C.C.No.45 of 2015, dated 24.07.2018.

2. The appellant/A2 is an accused in C.C.No.45 of 2015, on the file of the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under the EC and NDPS Act, Chennai. The appellant / A2 stood charged for the offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 29, 8(c) r/w 22(c) and 8(c) r/w.28 of the NDPS Act. He was sentenced to under go 10 years RI and pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for each of the offences, in default, to undergo further one year rigorous Imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows: (i) On 20.02.2015, at 20.00 Hrs, based on information received by P.W.1, Sanjai Kumar Acharya, the Intelligence Officer , over telephone that “One Javeed Basha and one Sadiq Basha, resident of Royapettah indulging in trafficking of Methamphetamine, Javeed Bash collected around 3 Kgs of Methamphetamine from Mumbai and trafficking it to Chennai by train, “Mumbai-Chennai Mail”, reaching Chennai Central on 21.02.2015, his brother Sadiq Basha will receive him at Chennai and they are to deliver the said Methamphetamine for further sale. “If surveillance is mounted at Chennai Central Railway Station, the persons may be identified and the contraband seized”. The Officers of Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai, after procuring two independent witnesses, mounted surveillance at the starting point of Platform No.3 of Chennai Central Railway Station, Chennai. (ii) Thereafter, P.W.1, on identifying the persons, informed them individually about their right under Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985 to get themselves searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer, for which, both of them individually replied that the Officers present there can search them. Both Javeed Basha and Sadiq Basha opened the black colour backpack, took out three identical sized packets, wrapped with colorful gift wrappers, and some used cloths and handed over to P.W.1. Then, P.W.1 took out a pinch of white colored crystal from each of the three packets, tested with Testing Kit, all answered positive confirming presence of “Methamphetamine”, a Psychotropic Substance, weighing 2.970, covered under NDPS Act, 1985. Took the accused to Bomb Detecting Squad office of RPF, seized the contraband in presence of Mahazar witnesses, served notice U/s 67, of the Act, recorded statement in the NCB office, on their admission arrested them. Both A1 & A2, produced on the same day along with contraband before Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, who remanded them to Judicial custody, thereafter produced documents and contraband before the Special Judge NDPS Act, Chennai. Contraband sent for chemical analysis, Forensic Report confirmed the psychotropic substances, collected documents, on completion of investigation final report filed.               4. On completion of investigation, the prosecution filed the complainant against the accused, for the offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 29, 8(c) r/w 22(c) and 8(c) r/w.28 of the NDPS Act.

5. In order to prove the case, the Prosecution examined 6 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.6, 81, marked documents as Exs.P1 to P.81 and 6 Material Objects M.O. 1 To M.O.6 . On the side of the defence Ex.D1, certified copy of -A- Register Extract, dated 19.05.2015 marked.

6. On the basis of the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under the EC and NDPS Act, Chennai found the accused guilty, convicted and sentenc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top