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

BENCH AT KALBURAGI
CHEMANSAB S/O KHAJASAB ALMEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.A 200021 2017



Crl.A.200021/2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.200021/2017

BETWEEN:

Chemansab S/o Khajasab Almel

AGed about 47 years

Occ: Nil, R/o Mundewadi Colony

Vijayapur.

.. APPELLANT

(By Sri.R.S.Lagali and

Sri.Gopalkrishna B.Yadav, Advs.)

AND

The State of Karnataka

By Vijayapur Excise Police, Vijayapur

Now rep. by Addl.SPP

High Court of Karnataka

Kalaburagi Bench.

.. RESPONDENT

(By Sri.Gururaj V.Hasilkar, HCGP)

This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of

the Code praying to set aside the impugned judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 11.01.2017 passed

in Special (NDPS) Case No.9/2017 by the Special

Judge/Prl.Sessions Judge at Vijayapur, by allowing this

appeal consequently acquit the appellant/accused of the

charges levied against him for the offences under Section

R

Crl.A.200021/2017

2

8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act,

in the interest of justice and equity.

This Appeal having been heard and reserved for

judgment

on

18.01.2021

and

coming

on

for

Pronouncement of Judgment this day, this Court delivered

the following:

J U D G M E N T

The

accused

No.1

in

Special

(NDPS)

Case

No.09/2015, who has been convicted by the Court of

Special Judge/Principal Sessions Judge, Vijayapura vide

its judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated

11th January 2017 for the offence under Section 8(c)

which is punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

(for short, "the NDPS Act") and sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay

a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to

undergo

simple

imprisonment

for

one

year,

has

approached this court in this appeal with a prayer to set

aside the said judgment and order of conviction and

sentence.

Crl.A.200021/2017

3

2. Brief facts of the case are:

On 26.02.2015 the complainant/PW-1 on receipt of

a credible information that huge quantity of ganja was

stored in the house of appellant, after informing his higher

officers, at about 2.40 p.m. conducted a raid along with

his staff and panch witnesses on the house of the

appellant situated near Sadakibawadi and Secab School

at Vijayapur. On seeing the raiding party, the appellant,

who was allegedly present near the house and was loading

ganja bags in a car bearing No.KA-03/MB-4261 ran away

from the spot. From the car, seven blue colour carry bags

containing 2 kilograms of ganja each and a white colour

urea bag containing 15 kilograms of ganja was seized.

Inside the house, the raiding party found a concrete tank

in which 98 blue colour carry bags containing ganja was

found. All the contraband articles were seized by the

complainant under a panchanama and after returning to

the office with the seized articles, a case was registered on

the basis of his complaint, in Vijayapura Excise Police

Crl.A.200021/2017

4

Station in Crime No.32/2015 for the offences punishable

under Sections 8(b) and 8(c) read with Sections 20 and 25

of the NDPS Act. After investigation, charge sheet was

filed against two persons. The second accused/Rajesh

M.Pachchapur was allegedly the owner of the Tata Indica

car bearing No.KA-03/MB-4261. Since accused No.2 was

absconding, the case against him was split up.

3. During the course of investigation, the appellant

was arrested on 29.09.2015. Charges were framed

against him for the offences under Section 8(c) which is

punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) and since the

accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried, the

case was posted for trial. During the course of trial, the

prosecution in order to establish the guilt of the accused

had examined 10 witnesses as PWs-1 to 10 and marked

25 documents as Exs.P1 to P25. In support

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