VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 3657 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra Applicant (Orig. Complainant) Vs. Deepak Rayappa Kambli Respondent Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, for the Applicant. Mr. R. D. Suryawanshi, for the Respondent. CORAM : Smt. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : JUNE 18, 2008. PC :- . The applicant/original complainant has filed this application for leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 31st January 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Session Case No. 321 of 2005. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent/original accused, of the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that on 2nd May 2005 P.S.I. Thakur, attached to Ulhasnagar Police Station received an information that accused has stored ganja in his two rooms. - 2 - Hence, the raid was conducted and ganja came to be seized. 3. I have heard learned APP Mr. V. B. Konde-Deshmukh, for the applicant and Mr. R. D. Suryawansi, for the respondent. I have perused the judgment and order as well as the evidence led by the prosecution. This is a case of seizure of ganja in pursuance of an information received by police officer. Section 42(1) of the N.D.P.S. Act provides that, when such information is received by a police officer, he has to reduce it in writing. Section 42(2) provides that where the information is taken down in writing, the officer has to forward its copy to his immediate official superior. Non-compliance of this mandatory provision is a major defect in the prosecution case and vitiates the entire proceeding. In the present case, there is no satisfactory evidence to show that this provision was complied. In this case, PW 2 P.S.I. Thakur did not make any report in writing to his immediate superior. Thus, there is no compliance of mandatory provisions of section 42(2) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. Thus, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly taken into consideration of the fact of non compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 42(2) of the N.D.P.S. Act and other aspects in the - 3 - evidence, and thereafter acquitted the accused. 4. Looking to the evidence on record, I am of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge is reasonable and proper. Hence, no interference in the order in question is called for. In the result, the application for leave to appeal is rejected. Sd/- [Smt. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.]