Prosecutorial compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is essential for establishing a conviction; procedural discrepancies can lead to reasonable doubt and result in overturning convictions.

JUDGMENT :

D. Dash,J.

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7th December, 2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- Cum-Special Judge under NDPS Act, Chatrapur (Ganjam) in 2(a) C.C. No.04 of 2017 (N) arising out of P.R. No.43/2017-18 dated 29.09.2017 of Sub-Inspector of Excise, Striking Force, Chatrapur, Ganajm.

By the impugned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the Appellant (accused) has been convicted for commission of the offence under section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the N.D.P.S. Act’). Accordingly, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and pay fine of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh) for commission of the said offence.

2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 29.09.2017 around 7.00 a.m, the Sub-Inspector (S.I.) of Excise Striking Force, Chatrapur, Ganjam (P.W.6) along with other Excise Officials were on patrolling duty and then they got some reliable information from RPR, Crime Branch, Khurda, East Coast Railway. So, they proceeded to the Platform No.2 of Chatrapur Railway Station and saw the accused carrying one red colour trolley bag and a blalck colour air bag. The S.I. of Excise (P.W.6) then giving his identity, searched those bags and asked the accused about the contents. It is stated that the accused told him that ganja had been kept in the bags. The S.I. of Excise (P.W.6) then searched the trolley bag and air bag held by the accused. He first of all mixing the contents of the two bags, brought one piece from each bag and by rubbing it on his palm and then pouring the same could get the smell. From that smell, colour, texture of the said contents of the trolley bag, P.W.6 asserted that those were nothing but ganja. He weighed the contents of the red colour trolley bag, which came to 15 kgs and that of black colour air bag, coming to 10 kgs of ganja. Thus, in total, he (P.W.6) found 25 kg of ganja from both the bags. He then drew two samples of 100 grams each from the contents of each the bags and kept the rest ganja inside the bags. The bags were then sealed by paper slip and all those were seized under seizure list. The case, being registered against the accused, the accused was forwarded in custody to the Court. The S.I. of Excise (P.W.6) then made the prayer for collection of samples and sending the same for chemical examination. The prayer, being allowed, the Court below directed him to do the needful. Ultimately, on receipt of the chemical examination report (Ext.11), the Final Prosecution Report (P.R.) was submitted and that is how the accused faced the Trial.

3. The Trial Court, after examination of the evidence both oral and documentary let in by the prosecution, has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has proved the charge against the accused that he, on that particular date, time and place, was in possession of 25 kgs of ganja beyond reasonable doubt and as such is liable to be punished under section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Accordingly, the accused has been convicted and sentenced as afore-stated.

4. Heard Mr.G.N. Parida, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr.P.K.Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent-State.

I have perused the impugned judgment of conviction passed by the Trial and Court and have also extensively travelled through the evidence of all the prosecution witness (P.Ws.1 to 8), more particularly the evidence of S.I. of Excise (P.W.6.)

5. Admittedly, P.W.6 drew two samples of 100 grams each from each bag from out of the contents and kept four numbers of samples in four envelopes