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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 14447

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Sh. Joseph Laldingngheta – Appellant
Versus
The State of Mizoram and Anr. – Respondent
Crl.A. 7 / 2025



GAHC030001712025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.A./7/2025 Sh. Joseph Laldingngheta S/o. Kaplawmthanga, R/o. Zokhawthar, Champhai District, Mizoram VERSUS The State of Mizoram and Anr.

Aizawl2:ASI C. Vanlalruat Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. TBC Zoremtluangi Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr.Lalpianfela Advocate for the respondents : Mrs.Ms.Vanneihsiami, Addl. P.P.

Date on which Judgment was reserved : 12.05.2026 Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 15.05.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the operative part of the Judgment:

-- : No Whether the full Judgment has been pronounced : Yes JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Lalpianfela as well as Ms.Vanneihsiami learned Addl. P.P. for the State respondent.

2. This is an appeal under section 374 Cr.PC/415 BNSS against the impugned judgment and sentence dated 18.10.2024 by the learned Special Court ND&PS Act Champhai in Crl. Trial No.197/2023 corresponding to Khawzawl PS Case No.19/2023 under section 21(C)/25 of the NDPS Act by which the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rupees 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh), in default to undergo SI for 6 months.

3. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal is that on 26.04.2023, ASI C.Vanlalruata of Khawzawl P.S submitted a suo moto FIR stating that on 26.04.2023 at 12.20 AM a telephonic information was received from Tuisenphai check gate that one vehicle i20 bearing registration No.MZ01E- 7744 driven by the present accused/appellant was detained on suspicion of carrying contraband items. Accordingly, he and his party rushed to the spot after submission of information in writing to the Officer-in-charge Khawzawl Police station. On arrival at the P.O they conducted search of the vehicle and recovered 80 soap cases containing brown powder suspected to be heroin weighing 894.18 grams. The recovered items were seized in the presence of reliable civilian witnesses from the possession of the appellant and the co- accused. The accused/appellant was arrested and brought to Khawzawl Police station along with the seized articles.Thereafter, the Khawzawl P.S case No.19/2023 under section 21(C)/25 NDPS Act was registered and duly investigated.

4. During investigation the I.O visited the P.O i.e Tuisenphai check gate about 4 kms from the police station. The complainant and the other witnesses and the accused persons were also examined. The inventory of the seized articles, the application for certifying correctness of inventory, certifying the photographs, drawing samples of the seized articles in the presence of the Magistrate and permission for disposal of seized articles were all duly prepared. On 26.04.2023, 5 grams was drawn as sample from each packet in the presence of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. On 27.04.2023 the samples of the seized articles were sent to FSL Aizawl for expert analysis. The FSL report confirmed that the seized articles contained heroin with purity of 83% w/w. Having found a prima facie case against the appellant/accused, the I.O submitted the charge-sheet against the appellant under section 21(C)/25 NDPS Act and sentup the appellant to Court to face trial.

5. The trial Court framed charge under section 21(C)/25 NDPS Act against the appellant. The charge was read over and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 5 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents while the accused person examined one defence witness.

6. The learned trial Court framed 2 points for determination:- (a) whether the accused is guilty of the charge under section

21(C/25 of the NDPS Act.

(b) if the above question is answered in affirmative what shall be the punishment.

Both the points were decided against the appellant and the trial Court held that the evidence adduced

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