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

2011 Supreme(Ori) 104

2011 (II) OLR — 28
S.K. MISHRA, J.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 153 of 2006
From the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 20.03.2006 passed by Sri J.J. Patra, Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Jajpur in G.R. Case No. 702 of 2001.
Bishnu Charan Singh... Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa... Respondent
Decided on 18th March, 2011.

Advocates:
For Appellant:M/s. A.H. Khan, A.K. Sasmal, N.C. Singh and A. Baral
For Respondent:Addl. Government Advocate

Headnote:1. NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985 - Sec. 21 - Conviction under - Appeal - Contradiction in the two Scientific reports - Reasonable doubt regarding the nature and character of the substance recovered from the alleged possession of the appellant - It casts a doubt on the prosecution case - Whenever two views are possible the view favouring the defence should be adopted or accepted by Court as the accused is presumed to be innocent till his guilt is established by cogent evidence - Held, benefit of doubt should be extended to the appellant and he should be acquitted of the charges - Conviction set aside.

       (Paras - 8 to 10)

       2. CRIMINAL TRIAL - Prosecution in order to succeed must establish the case it alleges - The burden is heavy on the prosecution to prove its case and in case of any reasonable doubt, the same shall enure to the benefit of the accused. (Para - 7)

JUDGMENT

S.K. MISHRA, J. — The appellant assails his conviction for the offence under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred as the ‘N.D.P.S. Act’ in G.R. Case No.702 of 2001 of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jajpur.

2.The appellant was prosecuted for having allegedly committed offence under Sections 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act on the allegation that on 04.08.2001 at about 12.30 P.M. one Baidhar Sahu, a known drug addict, was produced before the S.I. of Police Suprasanna Kumar Mallik of Chhatia Beat House, while he was moving in a suspicious manner. In course of interrogation, the said Baidhar Sahu informed that he used to purchase brown sugar from the appellant. Getting this information, the police officer made a station diary entry informing the I.I.C., Badachana P.S. about the same, sent requisition for deputing an Executive Magistrate to be present at the time of search of the house of the appellant. The Magistrate arrived at Chhatia Beat house at 4.00 P.M. Then, the police staff headed by S.I. of Police S.K. Mallik along with the Executive Magistrate proceeded to the house of the appellant after picking up of the independent witnesses on the way. On reaching the house of the appellant, the raiding party was informed by the wife that the appellant was absent in his house. The S.I. of Police then intimated her about his intention to search the house and the ground of such search. On being questioned, she desired that the search be taken up in presence of a Magistrate. Thereafter, the Magistrate was introduced to her. Thereafter, the police team conducted the search after following the procedure of such search.

During such search, the Police Officer found a heap of papers and damaged casket in the south-east corner of the bed room of the appellant. From underneath the heap two packets containing brown sugar were recovered. A goldsmith was summoned to that spot, who took weighment of the contents of the two packets which came to 130 grams and 257 grams. At the time of weighment, the appellant arrived at the house being brought by the Grama Rakhi. After informing him about the house search, four samples powder of 5 grams each from each of the two recovered packets were drawn by the goldsmith and packed separately in eight packets. The remaining portion of the recovered powder was packed separately. All these packets were sealed by using brass seal in presence, of the Executive Magistrate and the witnesses. As the appellant could not produce any authority for possession or doing business of narcotic drugs, the police officer seized all the packets in presence of the Magistrate and the witnesses, prepared the seizure list, arrested the appellant and brought him to the Police Station. At the Police Station, the Police Officer Mallik drew up a plain paper F.I.R. and presented the same before the I.I.C., Barachana Police Station, he handed over the seized packets to the I.I.C., who resealed the packets and kept them in the police Malkhana under safe custody. The I.I.C. directed the S.I. of Police Md. Sahed Hossain to take up investigation.

3.In course of investigation, the Police Officer Md. Sahed Hossain examined the informant and other witnesses, seized the relevant documents and forwarded the information to the Superintendent of Police on 05.08.2001. He also sent an Amin for demarcation of the land on which house of the appellant stands. On his prayer on 06.08.2001, the seized sample packets were sent to the S.F.S.L., Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar and C.S.F.L., Kolkata for chemical examination. Finally upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant under Sections 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

The defence took the plea of denial and false implication.

4.Prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined ten witnesses on its behalf. P.W.9 S.K. Mallik is the officer, who recovered the contraband articles from the house of t







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
whatsapp-icon Back to top