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 with. The court found the evidence of seizure and possession of contraband sufficient to convict the first accused. The acquittal of the second accused was upheld due to lack of sufficient evidence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Sections 377(2) and 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to set aside the order of acquittal of A1 Rasool Mydeen from all the charges u/s 8(c) r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 23(c) and 8(c) r/w Section 28 of the NDPS Act and A2 Amjath Khan @ Mathaiya from the charges under Section 8(c) r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 23(c), 8(c) r/w Section 21(c), 8(c) r/w Section 28 and 8(c) r/w Section 27A of the NDPS Act and convict the accused A1 Rasool Mydeen under Section 8(c) r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 23(c) and 8(c) r/w Section 28 of the NDPS Act and A2 Amjath Khan @ Mathaiya for the charges under Section 8(c) r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 23 (c), 8(c) r/w Section 21(c), 8(c) r/w Section 28 and 8(c) r/w Section 27A of the NDPS Act;

This Criminal Appeal is filed under Sections 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, preferred against the judgment made in C.C.No.21 of 2015 dated 11.09.2018 on the file of the Principle Special Judge, Principle Special Court under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai, convicting the appellant under section 8(c) r/w 21(c).)

Common Judgment

1. On 03.10.2014, at around 5.00AM, P.W.1, namely Sumit Arya, Intelligence Officer, NCB Chennai received a telephonic information that one Rasool Mydeen, aged thirty years is engaged in drug trafficking and he is coming from New Delhi to Chennai in the Tamil Nadu Express with 1kg of Heroine and he has procured the same in collusion and conspiracy with one Amjath Khan @ Mathaiya, who is also a resident of Ramanathapuram District, and thereafter is coming to hand over the same to the said Amjath Khan @ Mathaiya. P.W.1 reduced the said information into writing and after due information and permission from the Superintendent NCB, along with P.W.1, a team was formed and they reached the Central Railway Station around 7.00AM and were waiting along with the witnesses and about 7.30AM, the said Rasool Mydeen was identified and when the identity cards were shown, the said Rasool Mydeen offered himself to be searched by P.W.1 himself and upon further search, he handed over the contraband in two polythene bags from his black color backpack bag. Upon cutting open one of the bags and tested it for Heroine by using Drug Detecting Kit, since the test answered positive, after weighing the contraband and taking the sample of 5gms each, prepared the mahazar, completed the seizure formalities and handed over all the documents and properties to the Investigating Officer P.W.3. Thereupon, P.W.3 effected a formal arrest and sent the accused for remand and also handed over the contraband for testing.

2. Thereafter, P.W.6 completed the collection of evidence and filed a complaint against both the accused. The complaint was taken on file as C.C.No.21 of 2015 on the file of the Principle Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai and upon appearance and furnishing of copies under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Trial Court framed five charges against both the accused under Sections 8(c)r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 21(c), 8(c) r/w Section 28, 8(c) r/w Section 23(c) and 8(c) r/w Section 27A of the Act. Upon being questioned, the accused denied the charges and stood trial. Thereafter, to bring home the charges, on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.8 were examined and Exhibit P.1 to Exhibit P.71 were marked and M.O.1 to M.O.6 were also produced. Upon being questioned about the material evidences and the incriminating circumstances on record, the accused denied the same as false. Thereafter, no evidence was let in on behalf of the defence. The Trial Court therefore proceeded to hear learned Special Public Prosecutor on behalf of the prosecution and learned counsel for the accused and by a judgment dated 11.09.2018, acquitted the second accused of all the charges and acquitted the first accused for the charges under Sections 8(c) r/w Section 29, 8(c) r/w Section 28 and 8(c) r/w Section 23(c) of the NDPS Act, while convicti