JUDGMENT - Dr. E.S. DA SILVA, J.:---The appellant is the accused in Sessions Case No. 74 of 90 wherein he was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Panaji, under section 20(b)(ii) N.D.P.S. Act (hereinafter called the Act) and sentenced to undergo 14 years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- or in default to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for six months.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on information received from Head Constable K.G. Dessai on Intelligence Duty as Mapusa Police Station, P.S.I. Bosco George who is attached to the Anti Narcotic Cell at Panaji went to Mapusa, caught the accused in his barber's shop and took him for interrogation to ANC Office, Mapusa where the appellant disclosed that he was having Charas in his residence. Thereupon appellant, police party along with panchas went to the house of the appellant and from under the kitchen platform a plastic bag was recovered containing three packets of charas. Samples of the packets were taken by the I.O. and sent to the directorate of Health Services. The Junior Scientific Officer of the Directorate of Health Services reported that all the three samples were containing charas. Thereupon charge was framed against the appellant to which he pleaded guilty and claimed to be tried.

3. On behalf of the prosecution three witnesses were examined, namely, P.W. 1 Maria Caldeira, Junior Scientific Officer in Food and Drugs Laboratory of the Directorate of Health Services who has testified that the samples sent to her by the Police were containing charas. P.W. 2 Mahableshwar Naik is a panch witness who has deposed that he accompanied the raiding party along with the appellant to his house wherein charas were recovered by the Police at the instance of the appellant. P.W. 3 is P.S.I. Bosco George of the Anti Narcotic Cell who has conducted the raid along with the Police party and the panchas and after catching the appellant at his barber's shop at Mapusa, attached the drugs found at his residence. Thereupon the statement of the appellant was taken under section 313 Cr.P.C. One defence witness has deposed in his favour being D.W. 1 Ratna Bangalorkar who is his wife and has stated that at the time of the raid besides the appellant, her daughter Dreshani and one Kalmish were also staying in the house. However, the learned Sessions Judge believed the evidence of the prosecution and sentenced the appellant accordingly.

4. Shri J.P. D'Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, has strongly contended that the alleged disclosure made by the appellant before the panchas which according to the police led to the discovery of the drugs purportedly made by the raiding party under section 27 of the Evidence Act cannot be legally accepted. Shri D'Souza urged that there was to factual disclosure as such and the appellant has never expressed his willingness to disclose. However even assuming that such disclosure was made that also was done under duress being therefore not admissible in law under Article 20, Part III of the Constitution. Shri D'Souza has submitted that there were many contradictions of vital aspects of the case if statements of the prosecution witnesses were confronted with each other bearing also in mind the discrepancies which could be found between the statement of the Panch P.W. 1 Mahableshwar naik and the panchanama allegedly drawn by the police in his presence.

5. In order to appreciate the submissions made by Shri D'Souza it is useful to scrutinise the evidence given by the prosecution witnesses who have deposed in this case. As far as P.W. 1 Maria Caldeira is concerned it is seen from her deposition that there is no dispute on the part the appellant on the report given by this witness in respect of the samples sent by the police for examination which admittedly and as per the report submitted by her were containing charas. Therefore, the question which arises is whether the samples sent for examination had been in fact taken from any dr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document