1 cri-appln.113-11 mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 113 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010 Ashish Mangaonkar, Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Mumbai...Applicant Vs. Jitendra Panchal & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. A.S. Gadkari, Special P.P.,for the Applicant. Mrs. A.S.Pai, APP for the State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED: 1st February, 2011 P.C. Heard Mr. Gadkari, the learned Special P.P., for the applicant. 2. Criminal Application No.3285 of 2010 arising from N.D.P.S. Special Case No.67 of 2003 has been dismissed by us on 28th January, 2011 as we did not find any case made out to grant leave to appeal against the order of acquittal. The present respondent was also co-accused in N.D.P.S. No.67 of 2003 and as he could not be traced earlier he came to be arrested in 2 cri-appln.113-11 April, 2007 as per the statement of the complainant Ashish Mangaonkar at Exhibits 217 and 218 and, therefore, subsequently N.D.P.S. Special Case No.173 of 2007 was registered against him and he was put on trial for the very same offences. As per the order dated 25th November, 2009 the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit the respondent of all the charges and hence this application by the Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Mumbai, under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., for seeking leave to appeal. 4. Undoubtedly, for the very same reasons, as we have set out in our order dated 28th January, 2011 passed in Criminal Application No.3285 of 2010, this application would also fail and in addition to the said reasons, we would add the concluding observations made by the learned trial Judge in para.31 of the acquittal order, which reads as under:- “31. To conclude there is no evidence on record to show that present accused had gone to Nepal in concern with procurement of the contraband in question. There is absolutely no evidence that he placed an order for the contraband and was instrumental in importing the contraband from Nepal to Mumbai. There is absolutely no evidence that present accused was concerned with storing and possession of the contraband in Mumbai or that he had arranged for export of contraband from Mumbai to US. Even 3 cri-appln.113-11 though it is alleged that present accused found out a buyer for the imported consignment in US, no satisfactory evidence is adduced in this respect. In fact present accused was in Austria at the relevant time. Consequently he has no concern at all with the alleged recovery of contraband in US. There is absolutely no evidence about present accused entering into conspiracy with others. I therefore answer point Nos. 1 to 6 in the negative”. 5. Hence we are satisfied that there is no case made out o grant leave to appeal and, therefore, leave to appeal is refused and the application is rejected. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)