IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Devaraj - Appellant
Versus
State Rep.by Inspector of Police, Chennai - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 90 of 2012
Decided On : 15-09-2022
NDPS Act - Illegal Possession of Ganja - Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) - Summary: The court examined the errors in the prosecution case, including discrepancies in the expected time of presence of the accused, lack of explanation for the crime number on the label prepared before registration of the case, and custody of the contraband for 20 days after seizure. The court found lacunae in the prosecution's case and extended the benefit of the doubt to the appellant, leading to the reversal of the lower court's finding.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted for illegal possession of ganja and narcotic drug under the NDPS Act. The prosecution's case was based on specific information received by the police, leading to the seizure of contraband from the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found errors and discrepancies in the prosecution's case, including differences in expected time of presence, lack of explanation for the crime number on the label, and custody of the contraband for 20 days after seizure. Due to these lacunae, the court extended the benefit of the doubt to the appellant and reversed the lower court's finding.
Issues: Discrepancies in the expected time of presence, lack of explanation for the crime number on the label, and custody of the contraband after seizure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court extended the benefit of the doubt to the appellant due to the errors and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal is allowed, and the judgment of conviction and sentence is set aside. The Appellant is set at liberty forthwith, and any paid fine shall be refunded to him.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., r/w 36-B of NDPS Act, 1985 to set aside the conviction and sentence rendered by the Principal Special Judge of NDPS Act, Chennai dated 27.12.2011 in C.C.No.37 of 2005 in Crime No.97 of 2004 for offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and may be pleased to acquit the accused.)
1. This Criminal Appeal by the sole accused was convicted for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short “NDPS Act”)
2. The case of the prosecution is that based on specific information received by the Sub Inspector of Police, NIB CID, Chennai on 04.08.2004 at about 10.00a.m., a team of NIB headed by N.G.Kumar proceeded to Vyasarpadi, Erukkancheri High Road, Ambedkar College and kept surveillance for the person mentioned in the information, who was supposed to come there to sell ganja. At about 11.15 hours, the intercepted person was carrying ganja bag on his left shoulder, who was identified by the informant as the person, who had come to sell ganja. The said person disclosed his name as Devaraj and his residence. The local public declined to be a witness for the search procedure. Hence, in the presence of Head Constables Muruganantham and Danachezhian, the accused Devaraj was informed about his right under Section 50 of NDPS Act to opt for being searched by a Gazettted Officer or Judicial Magistrate. The accused Devaraj declined to exercise the option and said no objection for the Sub Inspector to conduct the search. Thereafter, Gunny bag carried by the accused Devaraj was opened and they found that it contains ganja and it is 15.500 kgs. From out of the lot, two samples each 50 grams was taken separately and packed in two small polythin cover and sealed. The balance 15.400 kgs of ganja kept in the gunny bag, tied and sealed and the samples and the major contraband was labelled with details.
3. PW-1 [Tr.N.G. Kumar] seized the contraband under mahazar and arrested the accused for illegal possession of ganja and narcotic drug. The arrest of the accused informed to the mother of the accused. The contraband was submitted to the Inspector under Form-95 for further proceedings. The accused was remanded to judicial custody. The detailed report of search and seizure under Section 57 of NPDS Act was forwarded to the immediate Superior, the Inspector of Police. One of the samples was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the Report was confirmed as cannabinoids. Final Report was filed and the accused was charged for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) of NDPS Act.
4. To prove the charges, the prosecution examined 4 witnesses and marked 13 exhibits. 3 Material Objects were marked.
5. The trial Court on considering the evidence found the accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo 2 years RI and fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months RI. Being aggrieved by the sentence and conviction, the present Criminal Appeal is filed.
6. The learned counsel, who filed appeal on behalf of the accused/appellant withdrew his appearance and therefore, Mr.Cibi Vishnu, was appointed by the Legal Services Authority as Legal Aid Counsel on behalf of the appellant.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the case of the prosecution bristles with infirmity and it lacks corroboration. The seizure of contraband was not supported by any public witness. When PW-1 has admitted that near the place of seizure, they were several Government Offices and shops, none of them were called to witness for the search and seizure. It is unbelievable that when the several respectful persons of the locality were available, PW-1 has called a person in the pavement running a temporary puncher shop. Ex.P1 the alleged information reduced into writing states that the accused with contraband will come to the place mentioned between 10.45 to 12.30. Whereas Ex.P2 time of offering the option under Sec
Benefit of the doubt extended to the appellant due to errors and discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act must be complied with for valid conviction.
Compliance with statutory provisions is essential in establishing guilt under the NDPS Act.
Compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act is crucial to safeguard the rights of the accused and establish guilt through foolproof procedures.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of complying with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly in relation to search, seizure, and sampling procedure....
Conviction under NDPS Act set aside for non-compliance with Section 50, lack of independent witnesses despite availability, and chain of custody infirmities, entitling accused to benefit of doubt due....
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.