SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) These three appeals are preferred on behalf of the appellants accused herein for assailing the judgment dated 16.2.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases, Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 16/2007 whereby, the learned Special Judge proceeded to convict and sentence the appellants as below: Prabhu Lal @ Dilip @ Subhash for offence under Section 8/18 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 10 Years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default to further undergo one year's additional imprisonment. Shambhu Lal and Babu Lal @ Baburam for offence under Section 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 10 Years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default to further undergo one year's additional imprisonment.
(2.) Succinctly stated factual matrix of the case is that Sushil Kumar Verma, Inspector posted in the Office of the Dy.Commissioner, Narcotics, C.B.N., Neemuch allegedly received a source information on 5.12.2006, which was taken down into writing. By way of follow up action, a raid party associated by two independent persons as Panchas was formed under the leadership of Shri Verma and a Nakabandi was laid at the Pandawaon Ka Kuan on the Begun-Bichhore-Bhilwara Road. At about 11 O'clock, the suspected Hero Honda motorcycle bearing registration No.RJ30-3M-5775 was seen coming and was flagged down to stop. Upon inquiry, the person driving the motorcycle identified himself to be Prabhu Lal @ Dilip @ Subhash. He was given the option as per law and then search of Prabhu Lal as well as of the motorcycle was taken. A canvas bag was seen hanging on the left side of the motorcycle. Inside the canvas bag, there was a gunny bag in which two polythene bags containing 4.650 kgs. and 5.250 kgs. (total 9.900 kgs.) of suspected opium were concealed. Samples were taken out from the seized contraband as per the prescribed procedure and were forwarded to the Govt. Alkaloid Works, Neemuch and upon analysis, the same tested positive for the essential ingredients of opium. Statement of Prabhu Lal was recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act and thereafter, he was arrested. Prabhu Lal allegedly informed that he had purchased the opium from Shambhu Lal. Accordingly, he was taken to Katunda Mod where he allegedly pointed out and identified Shambhu Lal. Notice under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act was allegedly given to Shambhu Lal and his statement was also recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act and thereafter, he too was arrested in the case. As a follow up of the information's received from Prabhu Lal and Shambhu Lal, the officers of C.B.N. reached Sojat City Bus Stand and gave a notice under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act to Babu Lal and recorded his statement under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act wherein he admitted that the seized opium was to be supplied to him. Thereafter, Babu Lal was also arrested and finally, a complaint came to be lodged against all the three accused persons in the court of the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases, Chittorgarh. The learned trial court framed charges against the accused persons who pleaded innocence and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited 31 documents and 7 articles. Upon being questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 the accused denied the prosecution allegations and claimed that they had been falsely implicated. However, no evidence was led in defence. The learned trial court, upon conclusion of trial, proceeded to accept the evidence of recovery given by the prosecution witnesses and the confessional statements of the accused persons recorded under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act wherefrom, it was divulged that the opium was procured by Prabhu Lal from Shambhu Lal @ Rs. 10,000/- per kg. and was being transported to be supplied to the accused Babu Lal. Accordingly, the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as above vide the judgment dated 16.2.2010 which is under challenge in these appeals.
(3.) Learned counsel Sarva Shri R.K. Charan and M.L. Bishnoi representing the accused appellants vehemently contended that the conviction of the accused as recorded by the trial court is bad on facts as well as in law.;