W é 1W9 ‘ *b\b v»/, & H16?! COLRT QF CHHATTE$€1ARH AT BIL£$PUR na. 0x gifriminai Appeai No 7'61 m‘ 23mg 1mm i AMT 5.9:?ish Kumar, Sia‘ hnganmfh émggm, (in faii) ' Agad abou? 35 year's, Rio. gaidec Sag. Eau €haii, Rajmndgcmn {CJEJ Vewus nggmmmm‘ WW Smfe 9f €hhat?i5gurh Thmugh P. a Kohmii, Rajnandgaon, DisTtRa‘jnandgaon ((23?) (APPWM HNDER qF‘CTXQN 374$} C5? CQDE GF CRKMINAL PROCEDURE ywv w: ISinaEg 5ench: Hm’bie M!” TR $hgmg, .1} Frasen‘r: 3 MtgDvBadm J I,ax’ munga§ f0!" 'Irhg mngiian‘t r I‘“ Mr..5ushii bubev, Grovernman‘r Advoca‘re for “the $m‘m GRAJL JUDQMENT waged on 9*“ Juiv, 2609‘; This agpam! is directed agains? the judgmen‘r of canvicfim and arder 9f $enfamze aim-ad 2332006 passed by fhe $pecia! Judge. unéer NDPS Act Rajmnégmni in §pgcial {hue NalZ/Qfz whareby fhz iearned $peciai Judge affar hoiding ‘rha appeiiun’r guiity for the affence punishable under Secficn 20 (3) (ii) of fhg Narcaiic Drug. and Psych0?rapic 5nbsmnce Act 19$5 {heremaf‘rer rei‘erzad Ta as ‘tiag Ad”) and sanfancgd him To under-go RI. for 4 yeam and 1'0 pay fim 9f Rs. ElmQJ—t in ('Evhulf 9f paymen? 02F fine Ta‘fum‘her underga 51. far 3 menfhs. 2. The J'udgmem of cmvic?im and 9rder 9f sewanca is shallenged nn the gmnrad Thar? wifhem fhem being (my evidance reim‘ing f0 cansciaus passggsien of eHcH‘ goni’mband gr%icia {@nja) and igmrjng We fag? that The pmsemficn has my? m‘mp‘ied mm +0 mandai’ory mwwans m? “w Ac? which i$ mean? fer“ prnViéi?=g ?%2 safeguard ‘m fine, accusad, ieamzd friai mar? has cammiffad an i!legcx§i*¥y m comvic’ring and sam'encing +119 gppeiianf cm afgrgmeniisnedV 3‘ Casa {if irhe pr‘we‘cui'iorg, in brief, i5 fha? fine ~app£§3cmf 3s reshiam 0f Qdjnandgqm‘ On 39,1i.29134 $¥at§hrwi §ingh 1:?W-12), 5mg Imtgec‘ror‘i has X yr @ recaivad ia‘zfgrma‘risn fmm 'rhe > infgrmanf fhai: 'irha appeiEmT is in pes_ession 0f camraband arfirzia Eranjg. $ha wags prapzmad .emo Vida EXP/6 befrare the wiTMSses and immediMeiy prgceaded far tha 5M? dong wifh the staff where she infmmeé fha right a“? The accused/appeihn? Vida Ex.P/& and thereaffer They searchad irhg hsusg acaéJpigd by fhg accusad. Twa bags of commbqnd arfEalas ‘mzm faund mside The hawz sf i’he accusgd vide EXP/5' Ideni‘ificafim ef 1412, properw was cgnrjuc'ted vida EXPXH. Seized ariidzs wara weighad ‘ 7 Exs4P,/12 and ?,I’13 which was found 11 E49“ 3n m2 bag and 6 k9 m amfher- bag yida ExPfit‘t Arficies wam sgizegi with firm hgip 9f we. 5 rupees mi?! af‘rer making u *f ’ ~ panchnama EXP/14. Ascusgd was arreS‘md vidz ExPi’19. 5pm? map wgs pregamd ‘ §Iide ExVP/QL'L Invasf§gafing offiarzzr and Qfhar smff aimg wi‘rh accused and s. - ' proper-w same m geia’ca smtégn whara ha bdgm! FIR. Vida ExPl‘E. Rajmmcha 5anha wera raaardad wide ExsPx’3 and PM. 50-50 grams gampies war-v3 Taken fmm each bag and same ware sem‘ for chamicai analygis to Fer-ansic Saienca Laborm’ary vide EXP/17. Sampkzs ware fauna! w‘‘iiak’. like @nja V§de EKPAZZ, Dakai Naiishi was preggmd Vida EX.P!24. " ~ 4. Affazr' reaordimg we sm'remen? Lander 5acfi0n 1&1 cf The CGdg 42f Crimina! Procedum, i973 kind afmr camgsktian 9f invesfigafion, charge sheaf was {Had in ‘ fha Cmw‘t at? The $peciai Judge, Rajmndgaan. 5‘ In wder To wove fhe, gum: Qf the appaiian‘fz'acausad, The prmzawicn hg$ gxaminw as many (as 12 witnassas. $1‘Q‘z‘amam af The nacusadm§gelimt was: mamalw umdar Szci'ian 313 9f ?he {Sade m‘ (Ir-Emma! Procedure, 1973, in which he, denied The: circurwmmas @paaring against him and gigadad innecame and false 'imp§im‘tion in The crasa. ' j 6V Lgmmed 5pasia§ Juaige affar gffgrding an appormniw cf ham-mg f0 The parfmsi gamvicmd and sgnfgnced The accuszdmlrfspeihnf as aforememignedw Z l haw heard Mtgaaadgayyn, coumai for Tha appelhm‘ and Mr.$u$hil Dubey, éwemmenf Adwcm'a for Th2 5mm and ggmsad the judgment impugnzd mad rgam‘d: of The fria! court am ‘ w 8. Lawmri caunsei fer tha {tppeilan§ submifs iim‘r thg pr-nwcuTSon afferly failed m pmve mnscicus passgssion 9f cah‘rmband articla and in fhn nhsance, 9f #hg accwed is eméiHad for acquitml‘ Lemma! gamma! fur‘rhzr suhméfs Tha? the: gymsacmmn has rm? comgaliad wi'i'. ”Hm mandmory provisians 9f .5iaecial Act which is mean? for providing me sn,aguard 1L9 The ascusgd. Laumad counsei fur‘rhgr submHs Thor? tha appeimm has campie'md 3 % ygars an? 9f 4 years and the pgriod already uyzdergem is sufficign? far cmvic‘tiw 9f tha aforagaid offanaan Lagmad mumel gigcgd decésmn of i‘ha Apex Cam-r in thg maffar of ghaga Ram Kashwaha v. 5mm af .‘A,P.1 in whisk €1' $155 been hdd by fke Apex 56m“? fha? §n casa cf §!ar§ng an Tha \ discrepangé‘s in the smfemen‘r of grmzcution witngsw convic‘rion came? be ‘swminad-‘and The appgHam is en'iifled far acquii’mi. ,Q. On trhg ather hand, judgmem' impugned. is guppor‘md 9n bghaif 0f flag. rzsgondam‘l5mia and submits that c’enscious pessessien 9f trivia nrcusad has §zen established by ‘i'he pmszciifien by adduaing avidanra. Tina pmsgcu'i'im has cgmpiied wi'i'h frag gmvisigns 9f Sgecia! Act and canyittim and sewerage. is susminabia under the iaw. 3 - ‘ \7w V / ‘2001 Cri LJ 116 . . . r. 19. In erdzr to asmbiish the ccmplici‘h; 9f The accusedfappeilam in ”the mime in. sues’rien, Tbs pmsgcu‘riw has emmmed SmtShrufi Singh (PW-1.2), Sub Insgecfw whQ has caiagoricaily depgwed Thai he recaived informa‘iian frem infQrmari? éXIP/é which ha ramrded Vida befm‘e The wimessas and ligmceeding for‘ +i'i2 sga‘i where: he intimai'gd the appellant far his vaiucsbig right vide. EXP/8 and ‘ihgr'em‘ier she. made sgarch of ‘i’he heusa sccupigd by the sppeiiant The , \ apgeiirmi was fgund in possessim 9f mic) bags Vida EXP/10 having ariicia like Csn‘ia. Ar‘ricie was examined by The witnesses by Test bum and rub vide EXP/1.1 ‘ and They found ‘i'hafr the same was Genie. Same was weighed yide EXP/13. 13. kg. and 6 kgi (imnja was failed. Gut 0f above artieies 50-50 grams sempies were mken‘ Emiiy preper‘iy was seized fmm the accused vide EXP/15 and sealed. Seem? imp‘was j Seem? greener-ed vide EXPJZO. Accused was arresi'ed vide Ex‘PflEJ. Dehm'i ;Neiishi was prepared vider EXP/24‘ She came 1'9 The peiice si'ai‘ion elnng with ether officers The supper'red try é» $hung$hwmr Singh {PW-1), Hand cans‘mbkw DweMm ?0Tia (PW-2), Superintawdgm 0f .pcaHma (Ci'hg), REDavdm (?W—3} who has rwktarkd FIR. 52am?! was canducted in me. ramsanca Qf $harda Prnmd {PW-§) cmé \linod Kumar‘ (PW—.7}. Ehmda Pmsad (PW-5) has specificaiiy dzposzd in his evidenca that pnHce mama Te Th2 Muse of the. appgliant and C-Jcmja MW: fognd in Tha hcuse 9f fhe appe!!r.mt Mamas were prgpared vide ExsP/é m PJ15 and Eanja was weighed an 111-, spot. In his crQsS-axamim‘rion, ha hns spagificaily daposed the: QvmJswd him$aif has mid ‘rhg‘r he has purchased Gnnja affa?‘ mying Rs.7QGO/-. (hnja was faund inside. tha hgu5e m? tE'ae appeHam: Vinod Kumar (PW-7) has aiso suppervfed the case 9f flag prmecufim. u i‘ 11. Thg defence has not been able 1'0 eJicH anything in his ci~oz<s~examimsfion f9 dissredif his tgsi‘im'eny. 5m1-amem' of Smféhruti Sing. (PW-12) is cormbemtgd by The .smmmen'ts of 5harda Pmsad (PW—5) and Vinod Kumar‘ {PW-7), indepgndeni wi+ne<s 12. After appreciafing fhaVevidance. available on recs-rd, ‘rhe iearned Specimi Judge has arrived a? c! finding trha'r The appeiient was found in possessim ofi-iz kg confmbend nrficies (écm‘lici) and mnvie‘ied and sentenced The espeiian‘i’ as afsre meniimed. iI ‘ . wS. 13. Taking infra cansidemfien the quanmm sf @anjci, ’H’ie Cour"? belsw has senfenced The appeiient DI for 4 year‘s and fine of Rs.1QQQ/-, in defaui? {if P.,avmen'i i .0 fine i is furiher‘ underne a 5‘1. f0!" 3 menfhs. Takin,9’ in‘m ca rmien The gum-iii)! of @nja, sen'fence is heii‘her- exsessive nar- unjust Convieiion end senienee is sus‘mimbie under fhe law. I do m? find any segpe for inferferenee in ‘i'he Judgmeni imgugned. Consequentiy, 'I'he appeal is liable Ta be dismised and it is hereby dismissed. 8/— "jt‘f;: ‘ n i