THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL APPEAL No.357 OF 2013

JUDGMENT :

The present criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant/

accused under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the judgment dated 10.04.2013 in NDPS SC No.29 of 2012 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, wherein and where under the accused/appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act, 1985 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

2. Heard Sri Palle Sriharinath learned counsel for the appellant and Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

3. The facts that germane for registration of the sessions case are that on 23.01.2012 at about 08.00 hours PW1/Police Constable of PS, Sirgapur lodged Ex.P1 complaint complaining that on the credible information that ganja was being cultivated in Malhapur Village, their team searched Malhalpur Village of Kalher Mandal and found cultivation of ganja plants numbering to 1,00,000 grown to a height of 3 to 3 ½ feet in the fields of the accused in an extent of Ac.1.00 Gts., in Sy.No.45/e and collected four samples of contraband ganja each weighing 100 grams in the presence of PW4 and one Balaiah, sent the samples for laboratory analysis to the Government Chemical Examiner, Regional Prohibition & Excise Laboratory, Nizamabad and got the land ploughed with tractor bearing No.AP 23 AC 0091 driven by PW5. The police registered FIR No.14 of 2012 on the file of PS, Sirgapur / Ex.P7. Upon obtaining positive report from the expert/Ex.P8, the police effected arrest of the accused on 14.05.2012 and upon completion of investigation, the police laid charge-sheet for the offence under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act, 1985 against the accused alleging that the accused viz. Karra Pomya cultivated contraband Ganja illegally in his agricultural fields and thus, he committed the offence punishable under Section 20(A) of NDPS Act, 1985. The trial Court, upon taking cognizance of the offence with which the accused was charge-sheeted, assigned NDPS SC No.29 of 2012.

4. Upon completion of required procedural formalities, the trial went on and PWs.1 to 6 were examined and Exs.P1 to P8 and MO1 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. The complainant is PW1, another constable who also participated in the raid was examined as PW2, PW3 is the eyewitness, PW4 is the mediator for scene of offence panchanama, PW5 is the driver of tractor and PW6 is the investigating officer.

5. Basing on the evidence adduced, the trial Court framed the points that whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act, 1985, with which he was charged, beyond all reasonable doubt and to what result. The trial Court answered the first point in favour of the prosecution by placing reliance on the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution and found the appellant guilty and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act. Though the trial Court recorded contradictions in the evidence of PW1 about his accompanying with SI after lodging the report/Ex.P1 and details of cultivator of the ganja and the extent of the land held that they would not be considered material to disbelieve the prosecution case and to believe that a false case was foisted against the accused. Consequent thereof, the second point was also answered in favour of the prosecution.

6. Challenging the said judgment, the accused/appellant preferred the present criminal appeal mainly contending that the findings of the trial Court are erroneous, baseless, based upon the contradictory statements of witnesses, panchanam