B.A.Zaidi, J. - (1.) OUT of the five accused against whom a complaint (Special S. T. No. 21 of 2000) was filed under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, only one was left (the present appellant) whom the Addl. Sessions Judge/F.T.C. No. 1, Siddharthnagar convicted under Section 20 (b) (ii) (c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to 5 year R.I. and a fine of Rs. 2 lac, in default, further imprisonment for two years.
(2.) HE has come in appeal here and has applied for bail. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Srivastava, advocate for the appellant and Sri Sanjay Singh, Addl. Government Advocate for the State. It was argued by counsel for the accused that there was no compliance of Section 50 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. That is not necessary because the contraband articles were recovered from the car and not from the person of the accused.
(3.) IT was also pointed out that there were two independent witnesses of recovery, but they were not examined. IT is being observed that there is a general public apathy in witnesses to appear in a court of law, presumably, because the court atmosphere is not conducive to the witnesses. It has also been argued that recovered charas was not produced at the time of trial. There is an order of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar dated 20.11.2001 under Section 52A of the Act with regard to disposal of seized material. It will not be proper to enter into merits of the evidence of recovery any further.;