2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 56808
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.523/2011
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.369/2011
IN CRL.A No.523/2011
BETWEEN:
STATE BY RAMPURA POLICE
STATION
… APPELLANT
(BY SRI.RAHUL RAI K., HCGP)
AND:
SIDDUNAIKA
S/O BODIYANAIKA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/O FARM HOUSE,
DOMMANAGADDE VILLAGE,
KOLLEGAL TALUK.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. NEERAJA KARANTH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K.S.N.KARANTH, ADVOCATE )
THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S.377 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE SENTENCE IMPOSED ON 24.2.11 PASSED BY
THE DIST. & S.J., CHAMARAJANAGAR IN SPL.C.NO.152/09
2
AND ENHANCE THE SENTENCE ON THE ACCUSED FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 20(b)(ii)(B) OF NDPS ACT.
*****
IN CRL.A No.369/2011
BETWEEN:
SIDDUNAIKA
S/O SODIYANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST
R/AT FARM HOUSE
DOMMANAGADDE VILLAGE
KOLLEGALA TALUK
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. NEERAJA KARANTH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. K.S.N. KARANTH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH RAMAPURA POLICE
..RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP)
THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S. 374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DT:24.2.11/1.3.11 PASSED BY THE
DIST. AND S.J., CHAMARAJANAGAR IN SPL.CASE NO.152/09
- CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S
20(b)(ii)(B)
OF
THE
NARCOTIC
DRUGS
AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR
ON
13.01.2022,
COMING
ON
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are directed against the
judgment and order of conviction passed by the
District & Sessions Judge, Chamarajnagar, in Special
Case No.152/2009 dated 24.02.2011 whereby the
learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the
offences punishable under sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of The
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
('NDPS Act' for short).
2.
Criminal Appeal No.369/2011 is filed by the
accused challenging the conviction, while Criminal
Appeal No.523/2011 is filed by the State aggrieved by
quantum
of
sentence
seeking
enhancement
of
sentence.
3.
Since both these appeals are arising out of
the same judgment, they are clubbed, heard and
common order is being pronounced.
4
4.
For the sake of convenience, the parties
herein are referred with their original ranks occupied
by them before the Trial court.
5.
The brief factual matrix leading to the case
is that the Ramapura police have submitted a charge
sheet against the accused for the offences under
Sections 20(a)(b)(i) of NDPS Act. The brief facts of
the case are that on 20.7.2008 at about 3.55 p.m. the
complainant has received a credible information
regarding accused transporting ganja illegally near
Forest Department residential quarters in Ramapura of
Kollegal Taluk. The complainant after obtaining the
necessary
permission
from
Dy.SP,
secured
immediately the gazetted officer and panchas and
went to the spot at about 4.15 p.m. wherein they
found that the accused was waiting by holding a
plastic bag and he did not answer properly when
questioned. On verification, it is found that the said
5
bag was containing 3 kg. 800 gms. of ganja and the
same was seized by the complainant by drawing a
mahazar. Then immediately he along with the seized
property returned to the police station and lodged a
complaint. At the time of drawing the mahazar he has
also taken sample and then the same was sent to FSL
laboratory and it is reported that the said property is
ganja. The investigating officer thereafter recorded
the statement of material witnesses and found that,
as there is sufficient material against the accused,
submitted the charge sheet. The accused was
arrested and was produced before the learned
Sessions Judge. He was initially remanded to judicial
custody and subsequently he was enlarged on bail.
6.
After submission of the charge sheet, the
learned Sessions Judge has taken cognizance of the
offence and issued process against the accused. The
accused appeared through his counsel and the
6
prosecution
papers
were
furnished
to
him
as
contemplated under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Then the
learned Sessions Judge has framed charge against the
accused for the offences punishable under section
20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. The same was read over and
explained to the accused. He pleaded not guilty. Then
the prosecution has examined in all seven witnesses
as PWs 1 to 7 and further the prosecution has also
relied five documents as per Exs.P1 to P5 and one
material object as per M.O.1.
7.
After completion of the evidence of the
prosecution, the statement of accused under Section
313 of Cr.P.C. is recorded to explain the incriminating
evidence appearing against him in the case of the
prosecution. The case of accused is of total denial and
he did not choose to lead any oral or documentary
evidence in support of his defence.
7
8.
After having heard the arguments and after
appreciating the oral and documentary evidence
placed on record, the learned Sessions Judge has
convicted the accused for the offence under Section
20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and sentenced him to
undergo imprisonment for a period of two months with
fine of Rs.2,000/- with default clause.
9.
Being
aggrieved
by
the
judgment
of
conviction and order of sentence, the accused has
filed Criminal Appeal No.369/2011 to set aside the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence, while
the State h