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

2001 Supreme(Ori) 59

High Court Of Orissa
P. K. PATRA
RAJU QURESI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - Respondent
Criminal Appeal 276  Of  1997
Decided On : 02/20/2001

Headnote:Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20(b)(i) and Section 25(1)(b) of Arms Act - Recovery of Ganja in house search of accused - Conviction challenged on plea that no material to prove exclusive and conscious possession of contraband by appellant - Appellant was not present in the room from where Gaya was recovered - No neighbouring witness examined that accused was the sole occupant of that house - No cogent evidence that accused was in exclusive possession of the house searched – Conviction could not be sustained.

       (Para 9)

       Result: Appeal allowed.

       

P. K. PATRA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant has challenged the judgment dated 5-11-1997 passed by Shri U. S. Mishra, Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in Sessions Trial No. 234 of 1996, convicting the Appellant under Section 20 (b) (i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1989 (for short 'the NDPS Act') and 25 (i) (b) of the Arms Act and sentensing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay Rs. 50,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year under the first count and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under the second count, with direction that the sentences will run concurrently.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case runs as follows :on 6-9-96 at about 6. 00 a. m. while the Officer-in-charge of the Jharsuguda Police Station (P. W. 6) was investigating Jharsuguda P. S. Case No. 191 dated 6-9-96 under Sections 147, 148, 302/149, IPC at Mangal Bazar Inside Jharsuguda town, he got reliable information that accused in that case, viz. , Gurudeb Behera who was a close friend of the appellant, (hereinafter REFERRED TO as 'the accused') had concealed his presence in the house of the accused at Mangal Bazar and, therefore, P. W. 6 conducted seach of the house of the accused. During search two attaches (M. Os. I and II) and one plastic bundle (M. O. III), were found below a cot and suspecting that fire arms might have been kept therein, the attaches and bundle were opened and seven packets of Ganja were found inside M. Os. I, II and III respectively. Further during search, one country-made pisto (M. O. IV) and country-made revolvers (M. O. V) and a catridge (M. O. VI) were recovered. Intimation was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Jharsuguda about the recovery of contraband Ganja and fire arms. Since the accused could not show any authority to possess such quantity of Ganja and fire arms, the same were seized in presence of witnesses. On weighment, it was found that MO. I contained 6 kgs. 930 grams of Ganja, M. O. II contained 4 kgs. 40 grams of Ganja and M. O. III contained 2 kgs. 900 grams of Ganja. Six samples were drawn up from M. Os. I, II and III, each weighing 24 grams (two each from M. Os. I, II and III) and the sample packets as well as the remaining quantity of contraband Ganja were duly sealed, using the brass seal of P. W. 6and the brase seal was kept in sima of a witness (P. W. 2 ). The accused was arrested and a plain paper F. I. R. (Ext. 7) was drawn up at the spot and on S. I. of the P. S. (P. W. 7) was directed to take up investigation. Ext. 7 was sent to the P. S. for registration of the case. The accused was taken up to the P. S. along with the seized articles which were kept in the P. S. Malkhana and on the nex day, the accused was taken forwarded to the Court in cusody and the seized aricles were produced in Court with prayer to the S. D. J. R. Jharsuguda to sent three sample packets for chemical examinaion. The chemical examination report (Ext. 10) revealed that the samples contained flowering and fruiting tope and leaves of Cannabis Native (Ganja ). The fire arms were sent for examination by the Director and Chemical Examiner to the Government of Orissa, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Rasulgarh, Bhubansawar and as per his report (Ext. 13), the resolver and pistol came under the purview of Arms Act and the cartridge was a live round. After obtaining sanction from the District Magistrate, Jharsuguda (vide Ext. 14) and after completion of investigation, P. W. 7 submitted charge-sheet against the accused, who stood his trial.

( 3 ) THE defence plea is one of denial and false implication.

( 4 ) IN order to bring bons the charge against the accused persons, prosecution has examined seven witnesses; of whom P. W. 6 is the C. I. C. of the P. S. who deected this case and P. W. 7 is the Investigating Officer. P. Ws. 1 and 2 are two independent witnesses who have not supported the prosecution case and have learned hostile






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