S. No. 2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

CRAA No. 9900003/2010

State of J&K

…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, GA vice

Mr. Suneel Malhotra, GA

Vs

Ghulam Nabi and another

.…. Respondent(s)

Through: None.

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN LAL,JUDGE

ORDER

1.

This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 10.04.2010, passed by the

court of learned Sessions Judge, Reasi (hereinafter to be referred as the

trial court) in case titled “State vs. Ghulam Nabi and another” by

virtue of which the respondents have been acquitted by the learned

trial court for commission of offences under Section 8/20/22/25 NDPS

Act.

2.

The judgment has been impugned on the ground that the learned trial

court has not properly appreciated the evidence and has passed the

judgment in a mechanical manner.

3.

Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, learned GA appearing vice Mr. Suneel Malhotra,

learned GA has vehemently argued that there is abundant evidence on

record in the form of the statement made by the Police Officials that

the contraband was recovered from the respondents but still the

learned trial court has acquitted the respondents.

2 CRAA No. 9900003/2010

4.

Heard and perused the record.

5.

The prosecution story, as it emanates from the charge-sheet, is that on

13.09.2006, the SHO, Police Station, Reasi along with other officials

reached the Bus Stand, Reasi. A person sitting in the Matador bearing

registration No. JK02D/4597 was brought down from the Matador. He

disclosed his name as Ghulam Nabi and during his search, a polythene

pack containing 8 maize covers with contraband were recovered from

him. They were weighed and were found to be 400 grams. Out of this

400 grams of contraband, sample of 50 grams was sent to the FSL for

chemical analysis and the remaining 350 grams contraband in seven

number maize covers was seized on spot. During the investigation, he

disclosed that he had obtained the said contraband from respondent

No. 2 i.e. Vidya Devi, who is involved in sale and purchase of the

contraband and some more Charas was still in her possession at her

residence. Thereafter, the SHO concerned along with other officials

went to the house of the respondent No. 2-Vidya Devi and as office

hours were over, therefore, the house of the respondent No. 2 was

searched without obtaining any warrants from the Magistrate. The

SHO concerned called SDPO on spot on telephone and thereafter,

search of the residential premises of the respondent No. 2 was

conducted. During search, six numbers of balls of contraband were

recovered from one side of the residential house of the respondent No.

2, out of which 40 grams were sent to the FSL for chemical analysis

and 39 Charas balls weighing 450 grams were recovered from other

side of the house of the respondent No. 2. From the residential house

of the respondent No. 2, a balance with weights measuring 500/500

3 CRAA No. 9900003/2010

grams two numbers, 200 grams one number, 100/100 grams three

numbers and 50 grams one number were also recovered. After

completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the

respondents on 06.11.2006. The respondent No. 2 was charged for

commission of offences under Section 8/20/22 NDPS Act whereas the

respondent No. 1 was charged for commission of offences under

Section 8/20/22/25 NDPS Act on 20.11.2006.

6.

As the respondents did not plead guilty, so the prosecution was

directed to lead evidence. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses, out

of which 6 witnesses who were civilians, turned hostile and did not

support the prosecution case.

7.

Prosecution witnesses i.e. PW-Pankaj Sharma, PW-Surinder Singh,