1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

C RA No. 684 of 2007

Judgment reserved on 21.09.2020

Judgment pronounced on 04.12.2020

Raja Naykar, S/o. Ganesh Naykar, Aged about 27 years,

Occupation – Labour, R/o Purana Bus Stand Power House, Bhilai,

Bairagi Mohalla, P.S. Chhavni, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh

---Appellant

Versus

The State of Chhattisgarh, Through – P.S. Chhavni, District – Durg,

Chhattisgarh

---Respondent

For Appellant

:

Mr. C.K. Nawrang and Mr. Basant

Dewangan, (Legal Aid) Advocates.

For Respondent

:

Mr. Sameer Sharma, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor

CAV Judgment

On 05.06.2004 at about 10.00 AM when Sub-Inspector M.K.

Dhruw (PW-9) along with other constables was on patrolling duty,

he received a secret information to the effect that the accused-

appellant herein along with his brother-in-law Nutta was selling

Ganja near a canal in contravention of the legal provisions. After

reducing the secret information to writing he forwarded the same to

City Superintendent of Police, Chhavni through constable No.369

namely Rohit, which was received by his reader as at the relevant

time concerned City Superintendent of Police was not present in his

office. Two persons namely Javed Khan (PW-5) and Naseer Ahmad

2

(not examined) were called by PW-9. Subsequently, they all went to

the spot, but on seeing the police party the accused-appellant tried

to run away carrying the bag which he was keeping with him. The

appellant was however apprehended by laying a siege. PW-9,

thereafter, apprised the accused-appellant of the secret information

received by him and also gave him a notice under Section 50 of the

Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (for brevity the

“NDPS Act”) vide Ex-P/11. The appellant was also informed about

his right to give search either to the Gazetted Officer or to the

Magistrate or to PW-9 himself vide Ex-P/12. On this being done, the

accused-appellant gave his consent for being examined by the PW-

9 himself. Sub-inspector and other constables first gave their own

search, but nothing objectionable was found in their possession,

which is evident from Ex-P/13. Thereafter, the appellant was also

searched in presence of witnesses. During search, some Ganja like

substance was found in the bag carried by the accused-appellant

vide Ex-P/15; weighing instruments were called by the constable

No.347 and on weighment being done 2.500 grams of contraband

being found in his possession, which is evident from Ex-P/16. There

upon, two samples of 50 grams each were taken out for sampling,

they were properly sealed and the seizure of the contraband was

effected under Ex-P/18 followed by arrest of the accused under Ex-

P/19. Accused-appellant along with the contraband so seized was

brought to the police station where FIR (Ex-P/21) was registered

against him for the offence under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act.

Contraband was kept in safe custody, the samples were sealed and

3

sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination vide

report Ex-P/6. As per the report of the Chemical Examiner, the

contraband was confirmed to be Ganja, and after completion of

investigation charge-sheet under the said Section was laid against

the accused-appellant.

2.

After going through the evidence adduced by the prosecution

learned Court below found the accused-appellant guilty under

Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act and sentence him to undergo R.I. for

two years with fine of Rs.3,000/-, plus default stipulation. Hence this

appeal.

3.

Counsel for the accused-appellant submits that though as

many as 10 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution yet

some of them who were material to the case in hand have been

given up for the reasons best known to it. He further submits that

the findings recorded by the Court below are not based on the

evidence given by the independent witnesses and the conviction