MADHUKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Click here to view full judgement.
ROHIT B.DEO,J. -
(1.) The appellant is assailing the judgment and order dated 14.11.2002 in Special Case 8/2000 delivered by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, by and under which, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as "the accused) is convicted of offence punishable under sections 8(b) and 14 punishable under section 20(a)(i) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/.
(2.) Heard Shri S.S. Shingne, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
(3.) Shri Shingne, the learned counsel for the accused submits that the judgment impugned is liable to be quashed and set aside on the short ground that the prosecution has failed to establish that the accused consciously cultivated the 45 cannabis (ganja) plant which according to the prosecution were grown in the courtyard of the house of the accused. Shri Shingne would further submit that consistent with the decision of this Court in Sudhakar Narayan Manjrekar v. State 2002 ALL MR (Cri) 1063 , the conviction ought to be set aside since admittedly the sample which was tested by the Chemical Analyzer weighed 180 grams while even according to the prosecution the sample which was extracted from the plants seized weighed 350 grams. The learned counsel for the accused would submit that the learned Sessions Judge fell in serious error in observing that the difference in weighed is attributable to loss or reduction of the water content.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.