JUDGEMENT

This criminal appeal has been preferred to challenge the judgment passed on 19.4.2023 by Special Judge (NDPS Act), Sagar, in Special Case SC NDPS No.01/2020. Under this judgment, appellants were convicted of the offence of Section 8 read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act for having in their illegal possession contraband (Ganja) and were sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/- along with additional rigorous imprisonment of six months, in case of non-payment of fine.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 29.8.2019, ASI J. S. Dhurve posted at Police Station, GRP, Sagar, received mukhbir soochna at around 2:20 a.m. regarding possession of illegal contraband with two passengers, who have deboarded the Utkal Express coming from Puri; he summoned two witnesses; prepared the mukhbir soochna Panchnama;

informed his superior officers by sending written report and also through wireless set and mobile; he proceeded for the spot along with his police team and the summoned witnesses; upon laying a seize, three persons were nabbed;

they were carrying individual bags; their identities were inquired about and they were informed about the mukhbir soochna; they were told about their right of being searched by a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer; on receiving their assent for search, ASI Shri Dhurve and his team first gave its search to the three suspects and then their bags were searched by the police party; appellants Ravi and Rahul were having "Ganja" in their shoulder bags while their companion Deepak Samanto was carrying "Ganja" in his trolley-bag; the "Ganja" seized from individual persons was weighed individually; the weight of "Ganja" which appellant Ravi Yadav was carrying was found to be six kilograms while appellant Rahul Shah was found to be carrying eight kilograms; their companion was found in possession of 11 kilograms; two samples were taken from each of the individually seized quantity; the seized quantity and the samples were sealed individually; the appellants and their companion were arrested and they were brought to the police station along with the seized "Ganja"; the "Ganja" was consigned to the custody of Malkhana Prabhari and FIR was registered; a detailed report was sent and the matter was taken up for investigation. After the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet was filed and the trial ensued in which appellants were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid while their companion Deepak Samanto was declared absconding.

3 . The grounds raised in this appeal are numerous but during final arguments, the counsel for appellants has prayed for leniency in the sentence awarded by the trial court while the judgment was not assailed by him on the finding of conviction.

4. The learned counsel for State has opposed this appeal both on the counts of finding of conviction and the quantum of sentence and has requested to dismiss it.

5. Both the parties have been heard and the record has been perused.

6. The record of the trial court reveals that prosecution has relied upon the testimony of 11 witnesses to prove its case, while defence has failed to examine even a single witness. The documents that were exhibited during evidence are Exs.P-1 to P-129, while no document was exhibited on behalf of defence. The material objects exhibited in this case are Articles "A" to "K". 7. The prosecution has primarily relied upon the testimony of Shri J. S. Dhurve (P.W.6) who has testified to all those facts which have been narrated in the paragraph relating to prosecution story. According to him, he was posted on 29.8.2019 as ASI in Police Station, GRP, Sagar, and received information at around 2:20 a.m. that some persons carrying "Ganja" have deboarded the Utkal Express and are standing on Platform No.2. He immediately prepared mukhbir soochna Panchnama, Ex.P-40, and made an entry in Rojnamcha Sanha, Ex.P-

41. He sent this information to his superior through Constable 530 Surendra Shak