- (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 5-2-1993 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, whereby he convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short the Act) and sentenced him to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and a half years. However, he acquitted co-accused Alam of the offence under Section 29 of the Act.
(2.) Succinctly stated the relevant facts are that on 11/02/1988, on the basis of a credible information, Anil Kumar Jain, Inspector, Customs (Prevention), Jaisalmer effected "Nakabandi" and kept surveillance at Asani Road, Jaisalmer. At about 5.40 p.m. the said Inspector along with two motbirs and member of the Preventive Party noticed Madan Lal Soni coming on a bicycle carrying one cotton bag hanged around his neck. He was taken to the Customs Office, Jaisalmer, where his search was conducted. It is alleged that 470 gms Charas contained in a card-box of Rajnigandha Paan Masala was recovered from his possession for which he had no licence. Indian currency notes worth Rs. 700.00 were also recovered from him. It is further alleged that on interrogation, he stated that those Rs. 700.00 were the sale proceeds of Charas sold by him. Therefore, the said Inspector seized the said 470 gms. of Charas, Indian currency notes worth Rs. 700.00 and the bicycle under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 on a reasonable belief that the said Charas had been imported into India through a route prescribed under Section 8(c) in contravention of the prohibition contained under Section 11 of the said Act read with Section 3(1)(2) of the Import and Export Act, 1947. It is the case of the prosecution that during preliminary inquiry said Madan Lal Soni disclosed that he had purchased the said Charas from appellant Prem Singh @ Pappu @ Papiya. Thereupon, P.W. 6 Trilok Dan Charan, Superintendent, Customs (P), Jaisalmer issued a search warrant dated 11-2-1988 Ex. P. 2 under Section 42 of the Act and under Section 10-J of the Customs Act directing and authorising P.W. 5 Bhag Chand Meena, Inspector, Customs to make a search of appellant's house situated in Kotari Para, Jaisalmer. It is further the case of the prosecution that on the same day at about 6 p.m., P.W. 5 Bhag Chand Meena and P.W. 6 Trilok Dan Charan along with motbirs Prag Singh and Manohar Singh conducted the search of the residential premises of appellant in his presence and recovered 900 gms. of Charas from a bag, which was lying in an open shelf (Aala) in a room. Since the Customs Party did not have the scales and weights with them, it is alleged that the said recovered Charas was handed over to the said motbirs and along with them the appellant was brought to Customs Office, Jaisalmer. P.W. 4, Judgal Kishore Soni was called there. He weighed the said Charas, which comprised of two large and eight small pieces having a total weight of 900 gms. From those pieces, four pieces of 10 gms each were taken as samples, which were sealed. The remaining Charas was also sealed in a separate bag. It is the case of the prosecution that the said contraband Charas, for which the appellant had no licence, was seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act as also under Section 42 of the Act vide seizure memo Ex. P. 1. It is further the case of the prosecution that the appellant voluntarily tendered his statement dated 11-2-88 before P.W. 6 Trilok Dan Charan, which was recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, wherein he admitted the recovery of seized 900 gms of Charas from his house and stated that the said Charas was' purchased by him from co-accused Alam five days ago at the rate of Rs. 5000.00 per Kg. He further stated that the said Charas was of Pak origin. P.W. 5 Bhag Chand Meena. arrested the appellant on 12-2-88 vide arrest memo Ex. P, 5 under Section 104 of the Customs Act and under Section 43 of the Act. On l5-2-88, report Ex. P. 6 pertaining to the said incident was also submitted before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer. A sample of the said Charas was sent by the Superintendent, Customs (P), Jaisalmer to the Chemical Examiner, Central Excise and Customs, Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi, who after chemical analysis vide his report dated 1-l l-88 Ex. P. 7 opined that the sample was that of 'Charas' and covered under the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. It appears that the appellant was once again arrested on 1-3-88 under the provisions of the Act vide arrest memo Ex. P. 4. After investigation, P.W. 5 Bhag Chand Meena submitted a criminal complaint against the appellant and co-accused Alam for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 22, 23 and 29 of the Act before the Magistrate, w ho committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge.
(3.) The appellant was charged for the offence under Section 20, while co-accused Alam was charged under Section 29 of the Act. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. The appellant categorically refused all the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence and asserted that neither any Charas was recovered from his possession nor he had voluntarily given any statement to the Customs authorities. He claimed that his signatures were procured on the statement Ex. P. 3 under coercion. The appellant examined two witnesses in his defence and submitted his ration card and relevant entries thereof in the ration card register of the Supply Department Ex. D1 to Ex. D4. After trial, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted co-accused Alam, but found the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 20 of the Act and sentenced him in the manner indicated above. Hence this appeal.;