1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2438 OF 2007 Union of India ...Applicant Vs. K.V.Sibichan Sebastian & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.R.F.Lambay, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P for the State CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. Dated : 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 P.C. : 1.This application has been filed by the Union of India through the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order of acquittal passed by the N.D.P.S Court in N.D.P.S Case No.63 of 2003. The application was filed belatedly and delay was condoned as prayed for in Criminal Application NO. 446 of 2007 as per the order passed by this Court on 25 th September, 2008. 2.On 18 th November, 2008 notices were issued to the respondents and were made returnable on 12 th January, 2009. These notices could not be served, 2 and ultimately liberty was granted to file fresh addresses. Bailable Warrant in a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was directed to be issued against the Respondent No.2 by this Court on 24 th June, 2009, which could not be served. The report of the DRI submitted to the Sessions Court, Mumbai goes to show that the address furnished by the said Respondent right at the threshold when they were caught by the DRI was fake. It appears even they could have gone to the extent of giving false identity of themselves. The service report in respect of Respondent No.1 states that no person of that name ever stayed on the given address. These reports undoubtedly make us believe that the DRI Officers did not verify the addresses as well as the identifications of the Respondents when they were taken in custody at the initial stage i.e. when the contraband was recovered from them or from their associates and even during the trial at no time such an exercise appears to have been undertaken by the DRI officers. Resultantly the Respondents have disappeared and they cannot be traced. 3.However, Mr. Lambay has hopes and he submits that the DRI officers will be able to trace the Respondents or any one of them in the near future 3 and on the basis he seeks to withdraw this application with liberty to file a fresh application with similar prayers as and when the Respondents or any of them is traced by the DRI officers. 4.Hence, leave granted and the application is disposed off as withdrawn with liberty as is available in law. [SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.] [B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.]