The prosecution's failure to prove presence and possession of contraband due to inconsistencies and non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements under the NDPS Act led to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

Since the appellants in all the three appeals were arrayed as accused in the same crime number, these appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposed by way of this common judgment.

2.The appellants are the accused in C.C.No. 389 of 2021 on the file of the First Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of NDPS Cases, Madurai They have filed these appeals challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on them for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) r/w 8(c) of the NDPS Act , to undergo 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each, in default to undergo 12 months’ rigorous imprisonment each.

3.According to the prosecution, P.W.3 received secret information on 26.06.2021 at about 7.45 p.m. regarding the illegal possession and transportation of a large quantity of ganja in a Hyundai Creta car bearing Registration No. TN-58-BW-0155 and a Splendor motorcycle bearing Registration No. TN-58-AF-0322, near Veeramudian Koil, opposite Kanmaykarai Road, Muthukpetai, Madurai. P.W.3 reduced the information into writing, made the corresponding entry in the General Diary, and forwarded it to his immediate superior, P.W.3, after complying with the mandate of Section 42 of the NDPS Act .Thereafter, proceeded to the place of occurrence along with the informer and P.Ws.1 and 2. Upon reaching the spot, the informer identified the vehicles. The police surrounded the accused, conducted a search after complying with the mandatory procedures under the Act, and allegedly recovered 40 kilograms of ganja from their possession. The accused were arrested; their confessions were recorded; and the contraband was seized. P.W.3 also prepared a report under Section 57 of the NDPS Act and submitted it to the Superior Officer. A case was registered in Crime No. 357 of 2021, and the accused were remanded to judicial custody. P.W.4 thereafter took up the investigation, examined the witnesses, collected the chemical analysis report, and filed the final report before the First Additional Special Court for NDPS Cases, Madurai, which was taken on file as C.C.No.389 of 2021

4.After taking cognizance, the Trial Court issued summons to the accused, furnished copies under Section 207 Cr.P.C., framed charges, and questioned the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and sought to face the trial.

5.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.4, marked Exhibits Ex.P1 to Ex.P16, and produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.9 After completing the prosecution evidence, the Trial Court questioned the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they denied the entire occurrence. In particular, A2/Rajjiyaprabhu @ Karuvayan stated that he was never involved in the alleged crime; that was picked up earlier and assaulted by the police; that his leg was fractured; and that he was admitted in the hospital, the remand was also made then. He further alleged that the police threatened him not to disclose about the assault, stating false cases would be framed against his family members. No defence witnesses or documents were produced.

6.The Trial Court, after considering the entire evidence, convicted the accused and imposed the impugned sentence. The appellants have now filed the present appeals before this Court.

7.The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there was total non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act , and that the alleged written report is a late