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

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
INDIRA K. JAIN, J
Shaikh Baba – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2001



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: U.P.Giri
For the Respondents: R.K.Ladda

Possession of contraband establishes liability under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act unless the accused proves lack of knowledge.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20(b)(i) - Conviction for possession of ganja - Appellant convicted and sentenced under Section 20(b)(i) after being found in possession of 85 grams of ganja during a raid at Central Jail - Court found evidence provided by prosecution consistent and reliable, fulfilling the procedural requirements of the Act. (Paras 1, 10, 14)

(B) Appellate review - The court must assess whether the conviction is based on substantial evidence; the trial court's findings were based on adequate witness testimonies corroborated by procedural compliance during the raid. (Paras 6, 11, 16)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was found with ganja while employed as a laborer at a jail construction site; his suspicious behavior led to a search which resulted in the seizure of ganja. Witnesses including jail staff and police officers confirmed the possession and proper procedure followed.

Findings of Court:
The trial court's conviction upheld due to consistent and credible eyewitness accounts, valid compliance with search and seizure protocols, and credible corroboration.

Issues: The main issues include the sufficiency of evidence relating to the appellant's possession of contraband and adherence to legal requirements during the seizure process.

Ratio Decidendi: Court affirmed that: Once possession of the contraband is established, it is incumbent on the accused to prove lack of knowledge regarding the illegal item; the appellant's defense of denial was insufficient to counter the established evidence.

Result: Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2001 is dismissed.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

This appeal takes an exception to the judgment and order, dated 13.6.2001 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Aurangabad in Special Case No. 309 of 1999. By the said judgment and order, original accused no.1 is convicted of the offence punisahble under Section 20 (b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.500/- and default clause.

2] For the sake of convenience, appellant is referred in his original status as an accused as he was referred before the Special Court.

3] The gist of prosecution case, as would be necessary to decide the present appeal, may be stated as under :-

(i) On 29.6.1999 work of construction was undertaken by Public Works Department through contractor in the premises of Central Jail, Aurangabad. Some outside labourers were engaged by the contractor to carry out the said work. Accused Shaikh Baba was one of the labourers engaged by the contractor for construction of work. Before the labourers could enter the gate of the jail, their search was taken by jail Hawaldars.

(ii) PW 3-Ramrao Uchegaonkar and PW 5- Motiram Rathod, Hawaldars were on duty at the southern gate of jail. They were taking search of the workers who were to enter the jail through southern gate. Accused no.1 was to enter the jail through southern gate. When his turn came, Hawaldar Uchegaonkar suspected him. Accused was looking frightened. On inquiry, it was found by Hawaldar Uchegaonkar that accused was possessing ganja. He reported the same to Senior Jailor PW 8-Dnyanoba Gutte. Mr. Gutte personally interrogated the accused and immediately sent report in writing to City Chowk police station for necessary action.

(iii) PW 1-Murlidhar Bahule, Police Sub-Inspector was attached to City Chowk police station at the relevant time. On receipt of report from Mr. Gutte, P.S.I. Bahule informed his superior officer Assistant Commissioner of Police. He called Special Executive Magistrate PW 4-Mr. Shashikant Bombale for conducting raid.

(iv) Then P.S.I. Bahule along with PW 6-Syed Salimoddin, Panch, another panch Adil Khan, Police staff and Special Executive Magistrate visited Central Jail, Aurangabad. Accused was caught hold by Hawaldar Uchegaonkar. P.S.I. Bahule told the accused purpose of the raid. Special Executive Magistrate Mr. Bombale offered search of the raiding party members to the accused and then personal search of accused was taken by the raiding party members. In search, ten packets of ganja were found with the accused. Measurement scale was brought from Jail canteen. Those packets were weighed. The weight of ganja was found 85 grams. A sample of 25 grams was taken. The packets were seized and sealed in the presence of panch witnesses on the spot. Thereafter along with seized ganja, accused P.S.I. Bahule came to City Chowk police station and lodged complaint on behalf of the State.

(v) On the basis of complaint, crime was registered against the accused. In the course of investigation, it was revealed that a convict Ramesh Jatwe who was undergoing life imprisonment in jail had given Rs.150/- to accused Shaikh Baba for purchase of ganja and Shaikh Baba purchased ganja from accused no.2 Habiba Begum. Accused no.2 was then arrested. Statements of witnesses were recorded. On completing investigation, charge sheet was submitted to the Special Court.

4] Charge of the alleged offence was explained to accused vide Exh.13. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Their defence was of total denial and false implication.

5] Prosecution examined in all eight witnesses in support of its case. On evaluation of evidence of prosecution witnesses, Trial Court came to the conclusion that charge was established against accused no.1 and convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated herein before. Hence this appeal.

6] Heard Shri U.P.Giri, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. R.K.Ladda, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the responde

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