JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The challenge in this appeal, by special leave, is to the
judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court dismissing the criminal appeal filed by the
appellant questioning the correctness of the judgment and
order passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.
By the said judgment, the appellant (original accused 3) andtwo others viz. Myla Rambabu and Myla Muralikrishna
(original accused 1 and 2 respectively and for convenience,
referred to as A1 and A2 respectively) were convicted for
offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)
(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985, (for short, the NDPS Act ) and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for six months each and to pay a fine
of Rs.5,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they were
directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each.
(3.) According to the prosecution, on 5/1/2001, PW-3 CI
Koteswara Rao on receiving reliable information about illegal
sale of Ganja at Koneru Bazar, Chenchupeta, Tenali,
proceeded to Koneru Bazar along with PW-1 PC Shaik Khasim,
PW-2 SI Nageswara Rao and one other constable. They
noticed the appellant, A1 and A2 sitting under a bridge. On
seeing them, the appellant, A1 and A2 tried to run away. PW-
3 CI Koteswara Rao and his team apprehended them. The
prosecution story further goes on to say that the appellant, A1
and A2 revealed their names. On questioning, they stated that
they were carrying Ganja packets in their pockets. It is
further the case of the prosecution that PW-3 CI Koteswara
Rao asked them whether they wanted any other gazetted
officer for their search and seizure in addition to him to which
they replied that they did not want any other gazetted officer
and checking by the Circle Inspector of Police was sufficient.
In the search, five Ganja packets were recovered from A1, six
Ganja packets were recovered from A2 and four Ganja packets
were recovered from the appellant. A1, A2 and the appellant
are stated to have confessed to the crime. They were then put
under arrest. After completion of the investigation, they were
charged for the offence under Sections 8(c) read with Section
20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty to
the charge. The evidence led by the prosecution found favour
with the trial court and it convicted the appellant, A1 and A2
as aforesaid. The appeal carried from the said judgment was
dismissed by the High Court. Hence, this appeal. It must be
noted here that A1 and A2 have not challenged the impugned
judgment and order and, hence, they are not before us.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.